Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “FRACTURES”

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 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2000

Extramedullary fixation implants for extracapsular hip fractures.

BACKGROUND: Extramedullary fixation of hip fractures refers to the application of a plate and screws to the lateral side of the proximal femur. OBJECTIVES: To compare different types of extramedullary fixation implants for the surgical treatment of extracapsular hip fracture in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register and reference lists of relevant articles. Date of the most recent search: March 1998. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised trials comparing extramedullary implants used in the fixation of extracapsular hip fracture in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All three reviewers independently assessed trial quality, using a ten item scale, and extracted data. Additional information was sought from all trialists. Wherever appropriate and possible, results of outcome measures were pooled by comparison. MAIN RESULTS: The methodological quality of all six included trials was poor and in no trial was there clear concealment of allocation. Three trials involving 355 patients compared a fixed nail plate (Jewett or McLaughlin) with the sliding hip screw (SHS). The limited data presented indicated an increased risk of fixation failure outcomes for fixed nail plates. One trial involving 233 patients compared the RAB plate (a fixed angle blade plate with an oblique connecting strut) with the SHS. In this trial both implants had a high incidence of fixation failure. There was a tendency to a lower incidence of cut-out, re-operation, fixation failure, leg shortening, varus deformity and mortality for the RAB plate. None of the differences in these outcomes were statistically significant. One trial involving 100 patients compared the Pugh nail and the SHS. There was no significant difference between implants for the outcome measures reported. One trial involving 176 patients with 182 fractures, compared the Medoff plate with the SHS. A significantly higher mean operative blood loss and longer mean operative time were reported for the Medoff plate. There was however a tendency to a lower risk of fixation failure for unstable trochanteric fractures fixed with the Medoff plate. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The fixed nail plate was demonstrated to have to an increased risk of implant breakage and fixation failure in comparison to the SHS. Although the lack of evidence from randomised trials for other outcomes means that a firm conclusion of overall superiority of the SHS cannot be made, the increased fixation failure rate is a major consideration and indicates that the SHS is preferable. Insufficient information is available to draw firm conclusions of the clinical significance of differences between the SHS and either the RAB plate, the Pugh nail or the Medoff plate.

Bone Plates↗
PubMed2000

Conservative interventions for treating distal radial fractures in adults.

BACKGROUND: Fracture of the distal radius is a common clinical problem particularly in elderly white women with osteoporosis, in whom the lifetime risk of this injury has been estimated as 15 per cent. OBJECTIVES: To determine the most appropriate conservative treatment for fractures (such as Colles') of the distal radius in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, Medline and reference lists of trials. Date of the most recent search: April 1998. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised clinical trials involving skeletally mature patients with a fracture of the distal radius, which compared commonly applied conservative interventions for fracture fixation. These included the application of an external support (plaster cast or brace) and fracture manipulation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All trials, judged as fitting the selection criteria by both reviewers, were independently assessed by both reviewers for methodological quality. Data were extracted for anatomical, functional and clinical, including complications, outcomes. The trials were grouped into categories relating to cast position, extent and duration of immobilisation, use of braces, cast material and fracture manipulation. Although quantitative data from some trials are presented, the lack of good quality trials and trial heterogeneity inhibited pooling of results. MAIN RESULTS: Over 50 randomised trials comparing treatment options for distal radial fractures were identified. Twenty nine trials of these, involving a total of 3199 mainly female and older patients, met the inclusion criteria for this review. Comprehensive details of the individual trials are provided in tabular form, and their results, grouped as indicated above, have been presented in text and analyses tables. The poor quality and heterogeneity in terms of patient characteristics, interventions compared and outcome measurement, of the included trials meant that no meta-analyses were undertaken. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised trials to determine which methods of conservative treatment are the most appropriate for the more common types of distal radial fractures in adults. Therefore, at present, practitioners applying conservative management should use an accepted technique with which they are familiar, and which is cost-effective from the perspective of their provider unit. Whilst tempting, any call for further research to clarify the most appropriate conservative treatment for this common fracture must be resisted for now. Instead it is important to reflect on the issues raised in this review, to ascertain patient preferences, prioritise researchable questions and undertake a systematic programme of research after agreeing a core data set for classification of fractures and outcomes.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Hip protectors for preventing hip fractures in the elderly.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture in the elderly is usually the result of a simple fall and hip protectors have been advocated as a means to reduce impact and consequences of such falls. OBJECTIVES: To determine if external hip protectors reduce the incidence of hip fractures in elderly persons following a fall. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, MEDLINE, and reference lists of relevant articles were searched, and identified trialists contacted. Date of the most recent search: August 1998. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing the use of hip protectors with a control group. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality, using a ten item scale, and extracted data. Additional information was sought from all trialists. Wherever appropriate and possible, the data are presented graphically. MAIN RESULTS: Five randomised trials involving 1681 participants were included within the review. All studies involved elderly people in nursing homes or residential care, three within the Scandinavian countries, one in Japan and one in the United Kingdom. The two largest studies involving 1409 participants randomised by nursing home or nursing home ward rather than by the individual (cluster randomisation). One study of 141 individuals was primarily a compliance study. Summation of results from four of these studies gave an occurrence of hip fractures of 13/620 (2.1%) for those allocated to wear hip protectors, against 57/920 (6.2%) to those not allocated to wear protectors. However due to the large number of participants allocated by cluster randomisation it was not possible to demonstrate conclusively that this difference between groups was statistically significant. Only one of the 13 hip fractures that occurred in the individuals allocated to wear hip protectors occurred whilst the protector was worn. No significant adverse effects of the hip protectors were reported but compliance, particularly in the long term, was poor. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Hip protectors appear to reduce the risk of hip fracture within a selected population at high risk of sustaining a hip fracture. However, this conclusion is based on four trials of low to moderate quality. As two used cluster randomisation, pooling of data was not possible. The generalisability of the results is unknown beyond high-risk populations. Results from six ongoing trials may clarify this situation. Acceptability by users of the protectors remains a problem, due to discomfort and practicality.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

Pre-operative traction for fractures of the proximal femur.

BACKGROUND: Pre-operative traction following an acute hip fracture remains standard practice in some hospitals. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of traction applied to the injured limb prior to surgery for a fractured hip. Different methods of applying traction (skin or skeletal) were considered. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, MEDLINE (1983 to August 1999), CINAHL (1982 to July 1999), EMBASE (1980 to September 1999), CENTRAL (Issue 4, 1999 of The Cochrane Library) and bibliographies of trial reports. Date of the most recent search: September 1999. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised trials comparing either skin or skeletal traction with no traction, or skin with skeletal traction for patients with an acute hip fracture prior to surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both reviewers independently assessed trial quality, using a nine item scale, and extracted data. Additional information was sought from all trialists. Wherever appropriate and possible, the data are presented graphically. MAIN RESULTS: Five randomised trials, mainly of moderate quality, involving a total of 635 predominantly elderly patients, were identified and included in the review. The review has been updated twice to include additional and new data from two of the studies. The availability of this additional data resulted in no important change in the results nor conclusions. The four trials which compared traction with no traction found no evidence of benefit from traction, either in the relief of pain, ease of fracture reduction or quality of fracture reduction at time of surgery. One of these trials included both skin and skeletal traction groups. This trial and one other which compared skeletal traction with skin traction found no important differences between these two methods, although the initial application of skeletal traction was noted as being more painful and most costly. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: From the evidence available, the routine use of traction (either skin or skeletal) prior to surgery for a hip fracture does not appear to have any benefit. Where a policy of general or selective application of traction exists, the choice of method must remain a decision based on evaluation of the individual patient. Further, high quality trials would be required to confirm or refute the absence of benefits of traction.

Femoral Fractures↗
PubMed1999

Association of prevalent vertebral fractures, bone density, and alendronate treatment with incident vertebral fractures: effect of number and spinal location of fractures. The Fracture Intervention Trial Research Group.

Vertebral fractures are the most common osteoporotic fracture and are associated with significant pain and disability. Prior vertebral fracture and low bone mineral density (BMD) are strong predictors of new vertebral fracture. Using data from 6082 women, ages 55-80 years, in the Fracture Intervention Trial (a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of the antiresorptive agent, alendronate), we explored the association of the number of prior vertebral fractures with the risk of new fractures and whether this association is influenced by the spinal location of fractures. The risk of future vertebral fractures increased with the number of prevalent fractures, independently of age and BMD; in the placebo group, more than half of the women with five or more fractures at baseline developed new vertebral fractures, compared to only 3.8% of women without prior vertebral fractures. The magnitude of association with an increased risk of future vertebral fractures was equal for prevalent fractures located in either the "lower" (T12-L4) (relative risk [RR] = 2.9; 95% CI = 1.9, 3.6) or "upper" (T4-10) spine (RR = 2.6; 95% CI = 1.9, 3.6). We found no evidence that the effectiveness of alendronate in reducing the risk of future vertebral fracture was attenuated in women with up to five or more prevalent fractures, or that it varied by the location of prevalent fractures. However, prevalent vertebral fractures in any location were more strongly associated with risk of new fractures in the upper (RR = 5.2; 95% CI = 3.2, 8.3) than in the lower spine (2.3; 1.6, 3.3). In addition, each 1 SD decrease in spinal BMD was associated with a 2.1 (1.7, 2.6) times greater odds of new fracture in the upper spine, compared with 1.5 (1.3, 1.8) for the lower spine. These findings suggest that, in older women, osteoporosis may be a stronger risk factor for new fractures in the upper (vs. lower) thoracolumbar spine, although we found no evidence that the location of prior fractures should influence treatment decisions. Physicians should recognize that prior vertebral fractures are a strong risk factor for future fractures, and consider treating such patients to reduce their risk of subsequent fractures.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

Nerve blocks (subcostal, lateral cutaneous, femoral, triple, psoas) for hip fractures.

BACKGROUND: Various nerve blocks using local anaesthetic agents have been used in order to reduce pain after hip fracture. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of nerve blocks (inserted either pre-operatively, operatively or post-operatively) as part of the treatment for a hip fracture. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, MEDLINE, and bibliographies of trial reports were searched. Date of the most recent search: April 1998. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials involving the use of nerve blocks as part of the care of a hip fracture patient. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality, by use of an eight item scale, and extracted data. Wherever appropriate, results of outcome measures were pooled. MAIN RESULTS: Six randomised or quasi-randomised trials involving 229 patients were included. One trial related to insertion of a nerve block pre-operatively and the remaining five, to peri-operative insertion. Nerve blocks resulted in a reduction of the quantity of parental or oral analgesia administered to control pain from the fracture/operation or during surgery. It was not possible to demonstrate if this reduction in analgesia use was associated with any clinical benefit. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Because of the small number of patients included in this review and the differing type of nerve blocks and timing of insertion, it is not possible to determine if nerve blocks confer any benefit when compared with other analgesic methods as part of the treatment of a hip fracture. Further trials with larger numbers of patients and full reporting of clinical outcomes would be justified.

Hip Fractures↗
PubMed2000

Vertebral fracture prevalence among women screened for the Fracture Intervention Trial and a simple clinical tool to screen for undiagnosed vertebral fractures. Fracture Intervention Trial Research Group.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of self-reported risk factors to identify postmenopausal women likely to have extant vertebral fractures because approximately two thirds of women with radiographic evidence of vertebral fracture are unaware of the fracture. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Questionnaire and spinal radiographic data were collected from postmenopausal women with a femoral neck bone mineral density T score of -1.6 or lower during screening for the Fracture Intervention Trial. Logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for extant vertebral fractures and to derive a final multivariable model. RESULTS: Almost two thirds of 25,816 women 55 years and older met the bone density criterion, and 21% of those had an extant vertebral fracture. The final model consisted of 5 self-reported items: history of vertebral fracture, history of nonvertebral fracture, age, height loss, and diagnosis of osteoporosis. These were combined to yield a Prevalent Vertebral Fracture Index (PVFI). The prevalence of women with vertebral fracture varied from 3.8% to 62.3% over the range PVFI of 0 to greater than 5. Among the 13,051 women screened with spinal radiographs, a PVFI of 4 or greater identified 65.5% of women with vertebral fractures (sensitivity), with a specificity of 68.6%. Excluding 881 women who reported prior vertebral fractures reduced the sensitivity to 53.6 % and increased the specificity to 70.7% but did not alter the fracture prevalence at PVFI values less than 6. CONCLUSION: In this population, 5 simple questions identified women who were likely to have undiagnosed vertebral fractures. Further research is needed to determine the validity of this index in other populations, including women without low bone mineral density.

Age Distribution↗
PubMed2000

Gamma and other cephalocondylic intramedullary nails versus extramedullary implants for extracapsular hip fractures.

BACKGROUND: Cephalocondylic intramedullary nails which are inserted proximally to distally (cephalocondylic) have been used for the surgical treatment of extracapsular hip fractures. OBJECTIVES: To update and expand our review comparing the Gamma nail with the sliding hip screw (SHS) by comparing all cephalocondylic intramedullary nails with extramedullary implants for the surgical treatment of extracapsular hip fractures in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, Medline, select orthopaedic journals and conference proceedings, and reference lists of relevant articles. We contacted trialists, colleagues and implant manufacturers. Date of the most recent search: June 1998. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing cephalocondylic nails with extramedullary implants for extracapsular hip fractures. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Additional information was sought from all trialists. Wherever appropriate and possible, results were pooled. MAIN RESULTS: The one trial of 230 patients comparing the Kuntscher-Y nail with the SHS, reported no major difference the outcome aside from a significantly increased number of patients with leg shortening, and a tendency for poorer recovery of mobility in the Kuntscher-Y nail group. Fourteen trials comparing the Gamma nail with the SHS were included, with data available for 1977 patients. The Gamma nail was associated with an increased risk of operative and later fracture of the femur and an increased re-operation rate. There were no major differences in the incidence of wound infection, mortality or medical complications between implants. Data were inadequate to determine if there were differences for other outcomes. Two trials involving 231 patients compared the intramedullary hip screw (IMHS) with the SHS. Fracture fixation complications were more common in the IMHS group: all cases of operative and later fracture of the femur and haematoma occurred in this group. Results for post-operative complications, mortality and functional outcomes were similar in the two groups. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Further evidence is required before any conclusions can be drawn on the relative merits of the Kuntscher-Y nail and the SHS. Given the lower complication rate of the SHS in comparison with the Gamma nail, it appears that for trochanteric fractures the SHS is superior. Further evidence is still required to confirm this, as well as to determine if the Gamma nail, or modifications of the Gamma nail, have advantages for selected fracture types (for example, subtrochanteric fractures). From the limited evidence available, IMHS appears to have the same problems as the Gamma nail, but other theoretical advantages of the IHMS can not be ruled out.

Bone Nails↗
PubMed1999

The degree of osteoporosis in patients with vertebral fracture and patients with hip fracture: relationship to incidence of vertebral fracture.

The most typical fracture that occurs in osteoporotic patients is a vertebral fracture, whereas hip fractures are thought to occur in the most severe osteoporotic patients. The purpose of this study was to compare the degree of osteoporosis between patients with vertebral fractures and patients with hip fracture by examining bone mineral density, biochemical markers of bone metabolism, and the incidence of vertebral fractures. Subjects were 50 female patients with vertebral fractures (VX) and 60 female patients with hip fracture (HX). Bone mineral densities (BMD) of the lumbar spine, femoral neck (Neck), and one-third of the radius were determined by DXA. Total and bone alkaline phosphatase, osteocalcin, N-MID osteocalcin, PICP, free deoxypyridinoline, and CTx were measured. All z-scores of BMD in the three areas of VX and HX patients were negative, meaning those BMDs were lower in VX and HX than a decade-matched normal reference. The z-score of Neck BMD was significantly lower in HX than in VX. Deoxypyridinoline and CTx were significantly higher in HX than in VX. N-MID osteocalcin was significantly lower in HX than in VX. VX and HX patients were divided into four subgroups according to the number of their vertebral fractures: VX, with a single fracture; VX, with multiple fractures; HX, without vertebral fractures: and HX, with vertebral fractures. VX with multiple fractures and HX with vertebral fractures had lower z-scores at all skeletal sites. HX with vertebral fractures had the lowest median z-score at spine and Neck, whereas HX without vertebral fractures had a low z-score only at Neck compared to VX with a single fracture. There was no significant difference in markers among the subgroups. The number of vertebral fractures was negatively correlated with z-scores of BMD at all three sites. We concluded that uncoupling between bone formation and resorption is greater in hip fractures than in vertebral fractures. Vertebral fractures are associated with general osteopenia of the total skeleton. We suggest that there are two types of osteoporosis in patients with hip fractures: one is that the bone mass of the femoral neck is specifically reduced, and the other is a terminal stage of osteoporosis which follows osteoporosis with vertebral fractures.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

Mobilisation strategies after hip fracture surgery in adults.

BACKGROUND: Post-operative care programmes after hip fracture surgery include strategies for mobilisation, such as early weight bearing, gait retraining and other physical therapy interventions. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of different mobilisation strategies and programmes after hip fracture surgery. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, Medline, and reference lists of relevant articles were searched. Date of the most recent search: August 1999. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised trials comparing different mobilisation strategies/programmes after hip fracture surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All reviewers independently assessed trial quality, using a ten item scale, and extracted data. Wherever appropriate and possible, the data are presented graphically. MAIN RESULTS: Each of the four included trials evaluated a different intervention. All had poor and / or poorly reported trial methodology. One trial of 100 patients compared twice daily with once daily physiotherapy. Only limited outcome data were available for checking the claims in the trial report that there was no demonstrable difference in recovery of the two patient groups at nine weeks follow-up. A treadmill gait retraining programme was compared with a conventional gait retraining programme in one trial of 40 patients. More patients in the treadmill group had recovered their pre-fracture level of mobility by the time of hospital discharge, which tended to happen earlier than for the control group. Neither of these differences were statistically significant. One trial of 24 patients compared neuromuscular stimulation of the quadriceps muscle with placebo stimulation. No data were available to test the claims that neuromuscular stimulation improved the recovery of mobility, assessed up to 13 weeks. One trial involving 273 patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture treated by internal fixation compared weight bearing at two weeks after surgery with delayed weight bearing at 12 weeks after surgery. From the limited data available, there were no statistically significant differences between the two methods of treatment for the outcomes of non-union, mortality and overall unfavourable outcome at one year (42/141 versus 50/132; relative risk = 0.79, 95%confidence interval = 0.56 to 1.10). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised trials to determine the effects of more frequent physiotherapy, treadmill gait retraining, or neuromuscular stimulation after hip fracture surgery. There is also insufficient evidence to determine the effects of early weight bearing after the internal fixation of an intracapsular proximal femoral fracture.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

The influence of fracture etiology and type on fracture healing: a review of 104 consecutive tibial shaft fractures.

This study was conducted to determine retrospectively the factors which influence fracture healing and risk for nonunion in patients with tibial shaft fractures. One hundred consecutive patients with 104 tibial shaft fractures and a mean age of 40 (14-85) years were reviewed. Fractures were classified according to the AO classification system. There were 22 open fractures and 52 comminuted fractures. Thirty-eight fractures were caused by high-energy trauma. Fracture pattern, soft-tissue condition, level of energy of the trauma, malalignment, and treatment methods were identified. The influence of these factors on the time of hospital stay and sick-leave, delayed union, and nonunion were calculated. Normal healing occurred in 61 fractures with a mean healing time of 17 weeks, delayed union in 27 with a mean of 35 weeks, and nonunion in 16 with a mean of 69 weeks. The relative risk of developing nonunion in open fractures was 8.2 (CI = 2.9-10.5) and 2.9 (CI = 1.2-3.2) in fractures exposed to high-energy trauma. This study showed that the soft-tissue condition and level of trauma energy are good predictors for the development of complications. Considering these risk factors at an early stage in the planning of treatment might reduce the risk of nonunion. ergy level of the trauma, fracture comminution, initial fracture displacement, treatment method, contamination, and associated injuries will influence fracture healing. Conservative treatment has in general been recommended for undisplaced closed or grade I open fractures caused by low-energy trauma [15, 18, 21]. However, conservative treatment of a tibial shaft fracture means immobilization of the lower leg for a long period of time, especially if healing is delayed. Thus, it is important to consider the risk of healing complications when planning the appropriate treatment method in the early stage after the injury. The purpose of this study was to analyze complications such as delayed union and nonunion and to identify factors which affect the healing of tibial shaft fractures.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1996

Randomised trial of effect of alendronate on risk of fracture in women with existing vertebral fractures. Fracture Intervention Trial Research Group.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that alendronate can increase bone mineral density (BMD) and prevent radiographically defined (morphometric) vertebral fractures. The Fracture Intervention Trial aimed to investigate the effect of alendronate on the risk of morphometric as well as clinically evident fractures in postmenopausal women with low bone mass. METHODS: Women aged 55-81 with low femoral-neck BMD were enrolled in two study groups based on presence or absence of an existing vertebral fracture. Results for women with at least one vertebral fracture at baseline are reported here. 2027 women were randomly assigned placebo (1005) or alendronate (1022) and followed up for 36 months. The dose of alendronate (initially 5 mg daily) was increased (to 10 mg daily) at 24 months, with maintenance of the double blind. Lateral spine radiography was done at baseline and at 24 and 36 months. New vertebral fractures, the primary endpoint, were defined by morphometry as a decrease of 20% (and at least 4 mm) in at least one vertebral height between the baseline and latest follow-up radiograph. Non-spine clinical fractures were confirmed by radiographic reports. New symptomatic vertebral fractures were based on self-report and confirmed by radiography. FINDINGS: Follow-up radiographs were obtained for 1946 women (98% of surviving participants). 78 (8.0%) of women in the alendronate group had one or more new morphometric vertebral fractures compared with 145 (15.0%) in the placebo group (relative risk 0.53 [95% Cl 0.41-0.68]). For clinically apparent vertebral fractures, the corresponding numbers were 23 (2.3%) alendronate and 50 (5.0%) placebo (relative hazard 0.45 [0.27-0.72]). The risk of any clinical fracture, the main secondary endpoint, was lower in the alendronate than in the placebo group (139 [13.6%] vs 183 [18.2%]; relative hazard 0.72 [0.58-0.90]). The relative hazards for hip fracture and wrist fracture for alendronate versus placebo were 0.49 (0.23-0.99) and 0.52 (0.31-0.87). There was no significant difference between the groups in numbers of adverse experiences, including upper-gastrointestinal disorders. INTERPRETATION: We conclude that among women with low bone mass and existing vertebral fractures, alendronate is well tolerated and substantially reduces the frequency of morphometric and clinical vertebral fractures, as well as other clinical fractures.

Aged↗
PubMed1997

Associations of early premenopausal fractures with subsequent fractures vary by sites and mechanisms of fractures.

In a retrospective population-based study we assessed whether and how self-reported former fractures sustained at the ages of 20-34 are associated with subsequent fractures sustained at the ages of 35-57. The 12,162 women who responded to fracture questions of the baseline postal enquiry (in 1989) of the Kuopio Osteoporosis Study, Finland formed the study population. They reported 589 former and 2092 subsequent fractures. The hazard ratio (HR), with 95% confidence interval (CI), of a subsequent fracture was 1.9 (1.6-2.3) in women with the history of a former fracture compared with women without such a history. A former low-energy wrist fracture was related to subsequent low-energy wrist [HR = 3.7 (2.0-6.8)] and high-energy nonwrist [HR = 2.4 (1.3-4.4)] fractures, whereas former high-energy nonwrist fractures were related only to subsequent high-energy nonwrist [HR = 2.8 (1.9-4.1)] but not to low-energy wrist [HR = 0.7 (0.3-1.8)] fractures. The analysis of bone mineral density (BMD) data of a subsample of premenopausal women who underwent dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) during 1989-91 revealed that those with a wrist fracture due to a fall on the same level at the age of 20-34 recorded 6.5% lower spinal (P = 0.140) and 10.5% lower femoral (P = 0.026) BMD than nonfractured women, whereas the corresponding differences for women with a former nonwrist fracture due to high-energy trauma were -1.8% (P = 0.721) and -2.4% (P = 0. 616), respectively. Our results suggest that an early premenopausal, low-energy wrist fracture is an indicator of low peak BMD which predisposes to subsequent fractures in general, whereas early high-energy fractures are mainly indicators of other and more specific extraskeletal factors which mainly predispose to same types of subsequent fractures only.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗
PubMed1993

Type of fall and risk of hip and wrist fractures: the study of osteoporotic fractures. The Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the causes of hip or wrist fractures. DESIGN: Case-control analysis nested in a prospective cohort study. SETTING: Four clinical centers in Baltimore, Maryland, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Portland, Oregon, and Monessen, Pennsylvania. PARTICIPANTS: Non-black women age 65 and older living in the community. MEASUREMENTS: We measured bone density, arm strength, and anthropometric characteristics at a baseline examination. Those who subsequently suffered hip (n = 130) or wrist (n = 294) fractures as a result of a fall and a consecutive sample of those who fell without a fracture (n = 467) were interviewed about their falls. RESULTS: In multivariate analyses, those who suffered hip fractures were more likely to have fallen sideways or straight down (odds ratio 3.3; 95% confidence interval 2.0 to 5.6) and to have landed on or near the hip (32.5; 9.9, 107.1) than women who fell without a fracture. Among women who fell on the hip, those with hip fractures were taller (1.5; 1.2, 2.2 per SD increase), less likely to have landed on a hand (0.3; 0.1 to 0.6) or to break the fall by grabbing or hitting an object (0.4; 0.2, 0.9), had weaker triceps (1.7; 1.2, 2.5 per SD decrease), and were more likely to land on a hard surface (2.8; 1.4, 5.5) than those without fractures. Women with wrist fractures were more likely to have fallen backward (2.2; 1.3, 3.8) and to have landed on a hand (20.4; 11.5, 36.0) than those who fell without a fracture. Among women who fell on the hand, those with wrist fractures were taller (1.4; 1.1, 1.8 per SD increase) and less likely to break the fall by grabbing or hitting an object (0.4; 0.2, 0.7). Among women who fell on their hip or hand, the risk of fracturing that site more than doubled for each standard deviation decrease in bone density at the site of fracture. CONCLUSIONS: The nature of the fall determines the type of fracture, while bone density and factors that increase or attenuate the force of impact of the fall determine whether a fracture will occur when a faller lands on a particular bone. These findings have important implications for prevention of fractures in older women.

Accidental Falls↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Effect of alendronate on risk of fracture in women with low bone density but without vertebral fractures: results from the Fracture Intervention Trial.

CONTEXT: Alendronate sodium reduces fracture risk in postmenopausal women who have vertebral fractures, but its effects on fracture risk have not been studied for women without vertebral fractures. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that 4 years of alendronate would decrease the risk of clinical and vertebral fractures in women who have low bone mineral density (BMD) but no vertebral fractures. DESIGN: Randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Eleven community-based clinical research centers. SUBJECTS: Women aged 54 to 81 years with a femoral neck BMD of 0.68 g/cm2 or less (Hologic Inc, Waltham, Mass) but no vertebral fracture; 4432 were randomized to alendronate or placebo and 4272 (96%) completed outcome measurements at the final visit (an average of 4.2 years later). INTERVENTION: All participants reporting calcium intakes of 1000 mg/d or less received a supplement containing 500 mg of calcium and 250 IU of cholecalciferol. Subjects were randomly assigned to either placebo or 5 mg/d of alendronate sodium for 2 years followed by 10 mg/d for the remainder of the trial. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical fractures confirmed by x-ray reports, new vertebral deformities detected by morphometric measurements on radiographs, and BMD measured by dual x-ray absorptiometry. RESULTS: Alendronate increased BMD at all sites studied (P<.001) and reduced clinical fractures from 312 in the placebo group to 272 in the intervention group, but not significantly so (14% reduction; relative hazard [RH], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-1.01). Alendronate reduced clinical fractures by 36% in women with baseline osteoporosis at the femoral neck (>2.5 SDs below the normal young adult mean; RH, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50-0.82; treatment-control difference, 6.5%; number needed to treat [NNT], 15), but there was no significant reduction among those with higher BMD (RH, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.87-1.35). Alendronate decreased the risk of radiographic vertebral fractures by 44% overall (relative risk, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.80; treatment-control difference, 1.7%; NNT, 60). Alendronate did not increase the risk of gastrointestinal or other adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: In women with low BMD but without vertebral fractures, 4 years of alendronate safely increased BMD and decreased the risk of first vertebral deformity. Alendronate significantly reduced the risk of clinical fractures among women with osteoporosis but not among women with higher BMD.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗
PubMed2000

Co-ordinated multidisciplinary approaches for inpatient rehabilitation of older patients with proximal femoral fractures.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture is a major cause of morbidity in older people and its impact, both on the individual and to society, is substantial. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effects of co-ordinated multidisciplinary inpatient rehabilitation, compared with usual orthopaedic care, for older patients with hip fracture. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, Medline (up to April 1998), and reference lists of published papers and books. We also contacted colleagues and trialists. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of postsurgical care using specialised rehabilitation of mainly older patients (aged 65 years or over) with hip fracture. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial assignment to included, excluded and awaiting assessment categories, was by consensus. Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Limited additional information was sought from most trialists. As well as pooling of data from primary outcomes, supplementary analyses were performed to combine clinically relevant outcomes and investigate possible explanatory factors. MAIN RESULTS: In this minor update, one new trial is identified and has been placed in "studies awaiting assessment". Of another three trials previously pending assessment, one has now been excluded. The five included trials involved 1068 patients. The combined outcomes of death or requiring institutional care at final follow-up showed no significant difference between intervention and control groups (Peto odds ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 1.18). There was considerable heterogeneity in length of stay and cost data. Using death and deterioration in function as a further combined outcome variable yielded a Peto odds ratio of 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.64 to 1. 07). This should be interpreted with caution due to heterogeneity. No quality of life measures were reported and the two trials investigating carer burden showed no detrimental effect from the intervention. The review update did not result in any new data for these outcomes. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The trials reviewed had different aims, interventions and outcomes. As a consequence, results were heterogeneous and the question of effectiveness of different types of co-ordinated inpatient rehabilitation after hip fracture cannot be answered conclusively. There is a trend to effectiveness when combined outcome variables (death and institutional care, death and deterioration in function) are considered. Future trials of postsurgical care involving inpatient rehabilitation, or other models such as 'early supported discharge' and 'hospital at home' schemes, should aim to establish both effectiveness and cost effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation overall, rather than attempt to evaluate its components.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

General versus spinal/epidural anaesthesia for surgery for hip fractures in adults.

BACKGROUND: The majority of hip fracture patients are treated surgically, requiring anaesthesia. OBJECTIVES: To compare different types of anaesthesia for surgical repair of hip fractures (proximal femoral fractures) in adults. This is primarily regional (spinal or epidural) anaesthesia versus inhalation general anaesthesia, but also includes ketamine anaesthesia versus inhalation general anaesthesia. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, Medline, selected orthopaedic and anaesthetic journals and conference proceedings, and reference lists of relevant articles. Date of the most recent search: August 1998. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing different methods of anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery in skeletally mature persons. Trials comparing the use of local nerve blocks are not considered in this review. Neither are trials using different types of drugs or techniques with one type of anaesthesia. The primary outcome was mortality. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality, using a nine item scale, and extracted data. The other two reviewers independently checked these results. Wherever appropriate and possible, results were pooled. MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen trials, involving 2162 patients, which compared regional anaesthesia with general anaesthesia, were included. All trials had methodological flaws. Regional anaesthesia was associated with a decreased mortality at one month (49/766 (6.4%) versus 76/812 (9.4%)) of borderline statistical significance (Peto odds ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.96)). The results for three month mortality were not statistically significant, although the confidence interval does not exclude the possibility of a clinically relevant reduction (86/726 (11.8%) versus 98/765 (12.8%), Peto odds ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.24). The reduced numbers at one year, coming exclusively from two studies, preclude any useful conclusions for long term mortality (80/354 (22.6%) versus 78/372 (21.0%), Peto odds ratio 1.10, 95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.57). Regional anaesthesia was associated with a tendency to a longer operation (weighted mean difference 4.8 minutes, 95% confidence interval 1.1 to 8.6 minutes), and a reduced risk of deep venous thrombosis (39/129 (30%) versus 61/37(76%); Peto odds ratio 0. 41, 95% confidence interval 0.23 to 0.72), although this conclusion is insecure due to possible selection bias in the subgroups in whom this outcome was measured. No other statistically significant differences in outcome were identified. There was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions from a further two included trials, involving a total of 100 patients, which compared other types of anaesthesia. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Regional anaesthesia and general anaesthesia appear to produce comparable results for most of the outcomes studied. Regional anaesthesia may reduce short-term mortality but no conclusions can be drawn for longer term mortality.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Role of fracture hematoma and periosteum during fracture healing in rats: interaction of fracture hematoma and the periosteum in the initial step of the healing process.

To study the mechanisms of fracture healing, we investigated the interaction between fracture hematoma and periosteum during the early phase of fracture healing in rats. Experimentally induced fractures of the tibia in untreated rats were compared histologically with such fractures in rats in which either the bone marrow or the periosteum had been removed. The extent of periosteal cell proliferation and chondrogenesis in the fracture hematoma was evaluated on experimental days 3, 6, 10, and 14. On day 3, periosteal cell proliferation at the tibial fracture site was decreased in the bone marrow-removed rats compared with the proliferation in untreated rats. Little chondrogenesis in the fracture hematoma was seen through day 6 in the periosteum-removed rats. These results suggest that the periosteum is important for mediating the primary steps of chondrogenesis and enchondral ossification in the fracture hematoma and that the fracture hematoma may be essential for periosteal cell proliferation during fracture healing.

Animals↗