What counts: outcome assessment after distal radius fractures in aged patients.

OBJECTIVES

Outcome of surgical interventions at the distal radius does not only depend on the type of intervention used, it also depends on the way the outcome is measured. Substantial differences in outcome assessment between different measurement tools and poor correlation among them result in the question about the best instrument for the evaluation of treatment after distal radius fractures. The aim of the review is to discuss pros and cons of the parameters that are available to assess the outcome after distal radius fractures. The review should help to choose the appropriate instruments for a given research question in aged patients with distal radius fractures.

DATA SOURCES AND SYNTHESIS

Objective and subjective measures were reviewed with respect to their suitability in outcome assessment. Radiological parameters like inclination, palmar slope, and length of the radius are most common and used to determine especially surgical success. Grip strength and range of motion are considered objective and used as study endpoints in many studies. Functional tests like the Jebsen test provide a realistic feedback about disability but require special skills and resources of the testing personnel. Patient self-assessment adds perceived patient benefit. The patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE) provides a reliable and valid instrument for subjective outcome assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of objective and subjective parameters should be used to assess the outcome of different treatment strategies due to the known discrepancies. Objective parameters like shortening, radial shift, or others should be clearly defined in the study methodology.