Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Arm Injuries”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 865 records · Page 48Linked to original sources
PubMed1994

Penetrating wounds of the extremities. Methods of identifying arterial injury.

Controversy surrounds the optimal management of a wound in proximity to a major vascular structure without clinical evidence of arterial injury. Current data suggest that physical examination alone can detect significant arterial injuries. If an arterial lesion is clinically silent on initial presentation, the natural history is most likely benign. In the rare case in which the arterial lesion degenerates into a more significant lesion, then it will do so slowly and can be repaired electively. In certain instances, there may be a penetrating wound that presents with a pulse deficit that resolves completely with observation. At this time, this is considered a hard sign of vascular injury and warrants aggressive preoperative evaluation.

Arm Injuries↗
PubMed2005

Severe upper extremity injuries in frontal automobile crashes: the effects of depowered airbags.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of depowered frontal airbags on the incidence of severe upper extremity injuries. METHODS: The National Automotive Sampling System database files from 1993 to 2000 were examined in a study that included 2,413,347 occupants who were exposed to an airbag deployment in the United States. RESULTS: Occupants exposed to a depowered airbag deployment were significantly more likely to sustain a severe upper extremity injury (3.9%) than those occupants exposed to a full-powered airbag deployment (2.5%) (P=.01). Full-powered systems resulted in an injury distribution of 89.2% fractures and 7.9% dislocations compared with depowered systems with 55.3% fractures and 44.3% dislocations. CONCLUSIONS: Although depowered airbags were designed to reduce the risk of injuries, they appear to have increased the overall incidence of severe upper extremity injuries through a shift from long bone fractures to joint dislocations.

Abbreviated Injury Scale↗
PubMed2005

Outcome instruments for the assessment of the upper extremity following trauma: a review.

Orthopaedic injuries are common among trauma patients and can result in long-term problems. Considerable data are available regarding functional outcomes following lower extremity trauma. There is, however, a paucity of data available for upper extremity trauma patients. Whilst currently available instruments appear to assess outcomes of relevance in trauma populations, the reliability, validity and responsiveness of these instruments have not been evaluated in the upper extremity trauma population. This paper reviews instruments designed for patient self-evaluation of musculoskeletal disorders of the upper extremity, and instruments used in an orthopaedic trauma population to assess functional recovery following injury. The Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (MFA), Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (SMFA), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Scale (ASES-s), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Elbow Scale (ASES-e), Patient Rated Elbow Evaluation (PREE), and the Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) were reviewed. Until research is published outlining the evaluation of assessment instruments in upper extremity orthopaedic populations, authors will need to conduct their own validation studies before investigating outcomes in specific trauma populations.

Arm Injuries↗
PubMed2006

Upper extremity fracture patterns following motor vehicle crashes differ for drivers and passengers.

PURPOSE: Injury patterns of occupants in motor vehicle crashes are changing, with upper extremity injury becoming more common in patients treated at trauma centres. Although not life threatening, upper extremity injuries may result in long-term disability, including chronic deformity, neurovascular compromise and degenerative arthritis. The purpose of this study was to compare upper extremity injury in drivers and passengers using the Crash Injury Research Engineering Network (CIREN) database. METHODS: CIREN data were used to compare upper extremity skeletal injury patterns and sources for drivers and passengers in frontal and side impacts. Occupant variables (age, gender, co-morbidity, avoidance maneuvers and restraint use) and crash variables (direction of impact, delta V and vehicle crush) were considered in the analysis. RESULTS: Only 24.8% of all occupants in the CIREN database had upper extremity injuries. One-half of upper extremity injuries to drivers were forearm fractures compared to one-third for passengers. Occupants in side impacts were more likely (OR=5.05) to have clavicle fractures, even while controlling for driver versus passenger status and safety belt use. Air bags were more likely to be a source of forearm fracture (OR=2.31) when controlling for driver versus passenger status, direction of force, sex and age compared to other sources. Only 10% of driver fractures with air bag deployment in frontal impacts were associated with air bag fling. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that drivers and passengers have different upper extremity injury patterns but the direction of impact also plays an important role.

Abbreviated Injury Scale↗
PubMed1997

[Whole body spiral CT in primary diagnosis of patients with multiple trauma in emergency situations].

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of a fast whole body helical CT scanner for primary diagnosis in trauma patients. METHODS: 27 severely injured patients (9 women, 18 men; mean age 43 years) were first examined with a helical CT scanner allowing for digital radiograms up to a length of 1024 mm and continuous helical scans of up to 70 seconds (slice thickness 3 to 10 mm, pitch factor up to 2). The primary CT diagnosis was verified either by x-ray after the CT examination or during the subsequent days, by abdominal ultrasound, by additional CT scans in the following days, and by clinical follow-up. RESULTS: CT showed all clinically relevant injuries of the head, spine, chest, abdomen and pelvis. The diagnosis and classification of vertebral fractures was performed immediately. 4% of the fractures of the extremities and the ribs were not seen primarily. 6% of the injuries were outside the CT scan field. CONCLUSION: Helical CT is a reliable and fast method to obtain vital information and to improve management planning in severely injured patients. It reduces the number of conventional x-ray examinations. In certain cases, additional x-rays of extremity fractures may be required.

Abdominal Injuries↗
PubMed1993

Safety belt restraints and compartment intrusions in frontal and lateral motor vehicle crashes: mechanisms of injuries, complications, and acute care costs.

A 3-year prospective study examined 76 frontal (F) and 45 lateral (L) motor vehicle crash (MVC) patients with regard to seatbelt restraint use and occupant compartment contact and intrusion injuries. These 121 MVC victims with multiple injuries (39 belted [B] and 82 non-belted [NB]), admitted to a level I trauma center, were studied by accident reconstruction and medical data analysis. They had a MVC mean impact velocity (delta V) of 30 +/- 11 mph and an injury Severity Score of 29 +/- 12. Proper restraint use reduced brain injury in F MVCs (30% FB vs. 47% FNB) but had no effect in L MVCs (63% LB vs. 30% FB [p < 0.06]). Belt use did not protect against lung, liver, spleen, pelvis, or lower extremity (LE) injury. These appeared to be more a function of crash direction, with LE injuries higher in F crashes (p < 0.04) and pelvis injuries (p < 0.001) higher in L crashes. In FB crashes, however, properly used safety restraints were the primary cause of bowel or colon injuries (p < 0.006). Belts did not prevent thoracic or abdominal solid organ injuries in L crashes. Contact-intrusions (CI) of the car occupant compartment in F crashes were the main cause of brain (A-pillar), lung and liver (steering wheel and instrument panel), and LE (toepan) injuries; but in L crashes, side-door CI caused lung, aorta, liver, and pelvic injuries. In contrast, contact-only (CO) injuries of the steering assembly were mainly responsible for injuries to the lung, heart, and liver in F crashes, and side-door CO for lung, liver, and spleen injuries in L crashes. Deaths and complications after injury were higher among F MVC occupants, or when delta V was > or = 30 mph. Hospital and professional costs reflect the complex care needed for victims of multiple injuries: FB, $99,000; FNB, $95,000; LB, $75,000; LNB, $79,000; total, $10.7 million. Present vehicle safety standards are not adequate, and structural design changes are needed to improve restraints and protect occupants from intrusion-related injuries.

Abdominal Injuries↗