Craig Andy, Barron Elizabeth, Sharma Hemant, Moulder Elizabeth
Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Hull Royal Infirmary, Hull, England, United Kingdom.
Department of Physiotherapy, Hull Royal Infirmary, Hull, England, United Kingdom.
Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2024 Jan-Apr;19(1):40-44. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1605.
The decision to use circular frame fixation for lower limb trauma, or elective deformity correction, often accompanies the assertion that the patient will be able to fully weight-bear through the limb immediately following surgery.
About 53 patients underwent retrospective review. Included in the study were current attendees of adult specialist physiotherapy, following circular frame application to the lower leg at our Institution between August 2018 and January 2020. Cases with incomplete data, cases given postoperative status of non-weight-bearing, those with physiotherapy follow-up conducted elsewhere, or cases of polytrauma were excluded from the study.Weight-bearing assessment and rehabilitation supervision were at the discretion of the physiotherapy team. The clinical concept of 'full weight-bearing' is poorly defined, but was documented in the context of displaying a stable gait using elbow crutches and subsequently without walking aids. Comparative data was analysed using an unpaired, two-tailed Welch's -test.
Mean postoperative time to full weight-bearing using crutches was 28.3 days (0-159) ( = 40).Mean postoperative time to independent full weight-bearing with no walking aids was 230.6 days (35-393), or 7.1 months (0-12) (= 34).No significant differences were seen between:Frames for open injuries (= 5) vs closed injuries ( = 17; > 0.4).Joint-spanning constructs (= 18) vs non-spanning constructs ( = 21; > 0.6), orTreatment of intra-articular injuries ( = 14) vs extra-articular injuries ( = 17; > 0.2).Interpretation of these results should be made with caution due to sample size.
The ability to permit patients to fully weight-bear immediately after surgery is often a distinct advantage of the circular frame over other fixation modalities, for a variety of indications. However, it does not follow that patients are capable of doing so; there is a long dependency on walking aids. This would appear to be the case irrespective of open/closed injuries, intra-/extra-articular injuries, or the use of a spanning construct across the knee or ankle.
Craig A, Barron E, Sharma H, . Do Patients Achieve "Full Weight-bearing" Immediately Following Application of Circular Frame Fixation of the Lower Limb? Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2024;19(1):40-44.
决定使用环形外固定架治疗下肢创伤或进行择期畸形矫正时,常常宣称患者在术后能够立即通过该肢体完全负重行走。
对约53例患者进行回顾性研究。纳入研究的患者为2018年8月至2020年1月期间在我院接受小腿环形外固定架治疗的成年专科物理治疗门诊患者。数据不完整的病例、术后被告知需非负重状态的病例、在其他地方接受物理治疗随访的病例或多发伤病例被排除在研究之外。负重评估和康复监督由物理治疗团队自行决定。“完全负重”的临床概念定义不明确,但记录的情况是患者使用肘拐能显示出稳定步态且随后无需辅助行走工具。使用非配对双尾韦尔奇t检验分析比较数据。
使用拐杖达到完全负重的术后平均时间为28.3天(0 - 159天)(n = 40)。无需辅助行走工具独立达到完全负重的术后平均时间为230.6天(35 - 393天),即7.1个月(0 - 12个月)(n = 34)。在以下情况之间未观察到显著差异:开放性损伤的外固定架(n = 5)与闭合性损伤的外固定架(n = 17;p > 0.4);跨越关节的固定结构(n = 18)与非跨越关节的固定结构(n = 21;p > 0.6),或关节内损伤的治疗(n = 14)与关节外损伤的治疗(n = 17;p > 0.2)。由于样本量的原因,对这些结果的解释应谨慎。
对于各种适应证,允许患者术后立即完全负重行走通常是环形外固定架相对于其他固定方式的一个明显优势。然而,这并不意味着患者有能力这样做;患者对辅助行走工具有很长时间的依赖。无论损伤是开放性/闭合性、关节内/关节外,还是使用跨越膝关节或踝关节的固定结构,情况似乎都是如此。
克雷格A、巴伦E、夏尔马H等。下肢环形外固定架固定术后患者能立即实现“完全负重”吗?《创伤与肢体重建策略》2024;19(1):40 - 44。