Functional treatment versus plaster for simple elbow dislocations (FuncSiE): a randomized trial

Treatment strategies for simple elbow dislocation - a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Current treatment concepts for simple elbow dislocation involve conservative and surgical approaches. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the superiority of one treatment strategy over the other by a qualitative analysis in adult patients who suffered simple elbow luxation.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and following the suggestions for reporting on qualitative summaries was performed. A literature search was conducted using PubMed and Scopus, including variations and combinations of the following keywords: elbow, radiohumeral, ulnohumeral, radioulnar, luxation, and therapy. Seventeen studies that performed a randomized controlled trial to compare treatment strategies as conservative or surgical procedures were included. Reviews are not selected for further qualitative analysis. The following outcome parameters were compared: range of motion (ROM), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand outcome measure (Quick-DASH), recurrent instability, pain measured by visual analog scale (VAS) and time to return to work (RW).

RESULTS

Early mobilization after conservative treatment strategies showed improved ROM compared to immobilization for up to 3 weeks after surgery with less extension deficit in the early mobilization group (16° ± 13°. vs. 19.5° ± 3°, p < 0.05), as well as excellent clinical outcome scores. Surgical approaches showed similar results compared to conservative treatment, leading to improved ROM (115 vs. 118 ± 2.8) and MEPS: 95 ± 7 vs. 92 ± 4.

CONCLUSION

Conservative treatment with early functional training of the elbow remains the first-line therapy for simple elbow dislocation. The surgical procedure provides similar outcomes compared to conservative treatment regarding MEPS and ROM for patients with slight initial instability in physical examination and radiographs. People with red flags for persistent instability, such as severe bilateral ligament injuries and moderate to severe instability during initial physical examination, should be considered for a primary surgical approach to prevent recurrent posterolateral and valgus instability. Postoperative early mobilization and early mobilization for conservatively treated patients is beneficial to improve patient outcome and ROM.

Arthroscopic rod technique compared to stress ultrasound in the dynamic evaluation of lateral ligament instabilities of the elbow

INTRODUCTION

The purpose was to compare the arthroscopic rod technique to stress ultrasound in the dynamic assessment of lateral elbow instabilities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifteen elbows of eight specimen with a mean age of 66.4 ± 13.3 years were assessed in a prone position following a defined dissection setup. After evaluation of the native status, an arthroscopic dissection of the radial collateral ligament (RCL) or lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL), and finally of entire capsuloligamentous structures was performed. Three raters examined each state (native, RCL or LUCL lesion, complete lesion) with the arthroscopic rod technique in 90° flexion and with stress ultrasound in 30 and 90° flexion. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to assess the interrater reliability as well as test-retest reliability for each testing modality (arthroscopy and ultrasound).

RESULTS

The arthroscopic rod technique showed a superior interrater and test-retest reliability of 0.953 and 0.959 (P < 0.001), respectively, when compared to stress ultrasound with an ICC of 0.4 and 0.611 (P < 0.001). A joint space opening during arthroscopy of > 6 mm humero-ulnar or > 7 mm humero-radial was indicative for a lateral collateral ligament lesion. However, a differentiation between an isolated RCL or LUCL tear was not possible. A lateral joint opening of ≥ 9 mm was only observed in complete tears of the lateral capsuloligamentous complex.

CONCLUSIONS

The arthroscopic rod technique showed a superior interrater and test-retest reliability when compared to stress ultrasound. Arthroscopic assessment for radial elbow instability was found to be reliable and reproducible. A joint gapping ≥ 9 mm in the arthroscopic evaluation is a sign for a complete insufficiency of the radial capsuloligamentous complex. However, it is not possible to precisely distinguish between a lesion of the RCL or LUCL by arthroscopy. On the basis of our results, dynamic ultrasound testing may be inappropriate to objectify lateral elbow instability.

Patient satisfaction, joint stability and return to sports following simple elbow dislocations: surgical versus non-surgical treatment

PURPOSE

While conservative management is commonly promoted for simple elbow dislocations, the importance of primary surgical treatment in these injuries is still undetermined. The objective of this study was to report patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), return to sports (RTS) and joint stability using ultrasound in patients following conservative or surgical treatment after simple elbow dislocation.

METHODS

Patients with a minimum follow-up of 24 months after conservative (CT) or surgical treatment (ST) following simple elbow dislocation were included in this retrospective study. To evaluate patients' postoperative outcome and satisfaction, the Elbow Self-Assessment Score (ESAS) was used, and validated scores such as the Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS), the Quick Disability of Arm and Shoulder Score (Quick-DASH) and RTS were assessed. For objective assessment of residual joint instability, a standardized clinical examination as well as a dynamic ultrasound evaluation of the affected and the contralateral elbow was performed.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients (26 women, 18 men) with an average age of 41.5 ± 15.3 years were available for follow-up survey (65.5 ± 30.4 months; range 26-123). 21 patients were treated conservatively and twenty-three patients received surgical treatment. CT and ST resulted in similar outcome with regard to ROM, ESAS (CT: 99.4 ± 1.5; ST: 99.8 ± 0.3), MEPS (CT: 97.3 ± 6.8 points; ST: 98.7 ± 3.3) and Quick-DASH (CT: 7.8 ± 10.4; ST: 6.3 ± 7.9) (n.s.). There was no difference in elbow stability and laxity measured by ultrasound between the study groups and compared to the healthy elbow (n.s.). Two patients of the CT group (10%) complained about persistent subjective elbow instability. RTS was faster after surgical compared to conservative treatment (p = 0.036).

CONCLUSION

Both, conservative and surgical treatment results in high patient satisfaction and good-to-excellent functional outcome after simple elbow dislocation. Even though ultrasound evaluation showed no significant differences in joint gapping between groups, 10% of conservatively treated patients complained about severe subjective instability. Surgically treated patients returned faster to their preoperatively performed sports. Thus, primary surgical treatment may be beneficial for high demanding patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, Level III.

Simple traumatic elbow dislocations; benefit from early functional rehabilitation: A systematic review with meta-analysis including PRISMA criteria

INTRODUCTION

Elbow dislocation is the second most frequent joint dislocation after shoulder dislocation. They have a high relevance because they can result in subsequent damage and limitations in range of motion. The treatment options are controversially discussed.The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to review the literature and analyze the evidence of early functional rehabilitation.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed via Ovid Medline, whereby 1645 publications were identified and evaluated in a stepwise approach. Of these publications 29 met the inclusion criteria of the authors and described simple elbow dislocations in 5765 patients.Data from the studies and subgroups included were initially categorized descriptively in conservative and surgical primary therapies, in immobilizing (immobilization lasting 2 weeks or longer) and free-functional follow-up treatments, and those data were then extracted from each subgroup in absolutes. We then pooled these numbers into descriptive statistics to ensure their comparability. We determined the success rates from the numbers of excellent and good results of the specific used outcome scores.

RESULTS

The effect estimate of the conservative therapy's success rate was 84% and for surgical treatment 80% (P < .0001). The difference between the immobilizing treatment (78% success rate) and early-function therapy (83% success rate) was significant (P = .002).In a subgroup analysis the success rate of conservative and immobilizing therapy was 79%, of conservative and early-functional therapy 91%, of surgical and immobilizing groups' was 77% and of the surgical and early-functional therapies was 93%. The difference among the 4 treatment options was significant (P < .0001), as were differences between the 2 conservative groups (P < .0001) and between the 2 surgical groups (P = .044).

DISCUSSION

Conservative therapy is the dominant therapy. Regardless of the primary therapy chosen in simple elbow dislocations: early functional follow-up care seems to be superior to immobilizing therapy with a duration more than 2 weeks.

Elbow Instability: Evaluation and Treatment

Acute elbow dislocations are commonly seen in clinical practice, and attention to management principles and strategies can help facilitate improved outcomes. Patients may present with simple elbow dislocation, in which nonoperative treatment is highly successful. Alternatively, fracture dislocations can be sometimes easily managed but frequently are associated with the need for surgical intervention and operative and postoperative challenges.

Early mobilization versus plaster immobilization of simple elbow dislocations: a cost analysis of the FuncSiE multicenter randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

The primary aim was to assess and compare the total costs (direct health care costs and indirect costs due to loss of production) after early mobilization versus plaster immobilization in patients with a simple elbow dislocation. It was hypothesized that early mobilization would not lead to higher direct and indirect costs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study used data of a multicenter randomized clinical trial (FuncSiE trial). From August 25, 2009 until September 18, 2012, 100 adult patients with a simple elbow dislocation were recruited and randomized to early mobilization (immediate motion exercises; n = 48) or 3 weeks plaster immobilization (n = 52). Patients completed questionnaires on health-related quality of life [EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) and Short Form-36 (SF-36 PCS and SF-36 MCS)], health care use, and work absence. Follow-up was 1 year. Primary outcome were the total costs at 1 year. Analysis was by intention to treat.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in EQ-5D, SF-36 PCS, and SF-36 MCS between the two groups. Mean total costs per patient were €3624 in the early mobilization group versus €7072 in the plaster group (p = 0.094). Shorter work absenteeism in the early mobilization group (10 versus 18 days; p = 0.027) did not lead to significantly lower costs for loss of productivity (€1719 in the early mobilization group versus €4589; p = 0.120).

CONCLUSION

From a clinical and a socio-economic point of view, early mobilization should be the treatment of choice for a simple elbow dislocation. Plaster immobilization has inferior results at almost double the cost.

Functional outcomes and complications of open elbow dislocations

Background

The current study investigated the clinical outcome of open elbow dislocations, focusing on the influence of associated soft tissue and bone injury.

Patients and methods

From October 2008 to August 2015, 230 patients with elbow dislocations were treated at the study center. Our retrospective study comprised 21 cases of open elbow dislocations. The mean age of patients was 49 years (20–83 years); there were six (29%) female and 15 (71%) male patients. The range of motion (ROM) of the injured and uninjured elbow was measured, and the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Mayo Wrist Score (MWS), and Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score were assessed. Complications and revision surgeries were recorded. The influence of the severity of soft tissue injury (I°/II° open vs. III° open) and type of dislocation (simple vs. complex) was evaluated.

Results

After a 57-month follow-up (range, 24–98 months), the mean DASH score was 20 ± 15, the MEPS was 82 ± 11, and the MWS was 74 ± 22. The ROM of the injured elbow was significantly decreased compared with the uninjured one (arc of ulnohumeral motion: 104° vs. 137°; p = 0.001). Patients with I°/II° open elbow dislocations had a better clinical outcome according to the MEPS (86 ± 11 vs. 76 ± 9; p = 0.045) and a comparable outcome according to the DASH score (19 ± 18 vs. 21 ± 9; p = 0.238). In all, 11 patients (52%) had postoperative complications and 11 patients underwent at least one revision surgery. Complex elbow dislocations had significantly more complications and revision surgeries than simple dislocations (77% vs. 13%; p = 0.008).

Conclusion

Favorable clinical outcomes can be achieved after treatment of open elbow dislocations. These injuries are prone to neurovascular damage and complex dislocations are linked to high rates of complications and revision surgeries.

Determination of Elbow Laxity in a Sequential Soft-Tissue Injury Model: A Cadaveric Study

BACKGROUND

The objective of our study was to analyze, under fluoroscopy, joint angulation of uninjured elbows and elbows with distinct induced collateral ligament injury.

METHODS

Twelve elbow specimens were tested for varus and valgus joint angulation using 4 different examination methods (application of both varus and valgus stress by each of 2 examiners [Examiner 1 and Examiner 2] and application of 1 and 2 Nm of torque using a calibrated electric force scale) in 4 elbow positions (in full extension with 90° of supination and 90° of pronation, and in 30° of flexion with 90° of supination and 90° of pronation). Six elbow specimens were examined under varus stress at each of 5 sequential stages: (1) intact, (2) transection of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL), (3) complete transection of the lateral collateral ligament complex (LCLC), (4) transection of the anterior aspect of the capsule (AC), and (5) transection of the medial collateral ligament (MCL). An additional 6 elbow specimens were examined under valgus stress at 5 sequential stages: (1) intact, (2) transection of the anteromedial collateral ligament (AML), (3) complete transection of the MCL, (4) transection of the AC, and (5) transection of the LCLC. Examinations under fluoroscopy were made to measure the joint angulation. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Testing of the intact elbow specimen by both examiners showed a joint angulation of <5°. Transection of the LUCL led to a varus joint angulation of 4.3° to 7.0°, and transection of the AML resulted in a valgus joint angulation of 4.9° to 8.8°. Complete dissection of the respective collateral ligament complex resulted in a joint angulation of 7.9° to 13.4° (LCLC) and 9.1° to 12.3° (MCL), and additional transection of the AC led to a joint angulation of >20° in some positions in both the medial and the lateral series. Under varus stress, elbow dislocations occurred only after dissection of the LCLC+AC (26% of the examinations) and additional dissection of the MCL (59%). Under valgus stress, elbow dislocations occurred only after dissection of the MCL+AC (30%) and additional dissection of the LCLC (47%). Very good to excellent ICCs were found among Examiners 1 and 2 and the tests done with the standardized torques at stages 1 through 4.

CONCLUSIONS

Dynamic fluoroscopy makes it possible to distinguish among different stages of collateral ligament injury of the elbow and therefore might be helpful for guiding treatment of simple elbow dislocations.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Assessment of collateral ligament injury with varus and valgus stress testing under fluoroscopy is an easily available method and is often used as the imaging modality of choice to determine the degree of elbow laxity. The technique and results described in this study should form the basis for additional clinical studies.

Validation of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle-Hindfoot Scale Dutch language version in patients with hindfoot fractures

OBJECTIVES

The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale is among the most used questionnaires for measuring functional recovery after a hindfoot injury. Recently, this instrument was translated and culturally adapted into a Dutch version. In this study, the measurement properties of the Dutch language version (DLV) were investigated in patients with a unilateral hindfoot fracture.

DESIGN

Multicentre, prospective observational study.

SETTING

This multicentre study was conducted in three Dutch hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

In total, 118 patients with a unilateral hindfoot fracture were included. Three patients were lost to follow-up.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients were asked to complete the AOFAS-DLV, the Foot Function Index and the Short Form-36 on three occasions. Descriptive statistics (including floor and ceiling effects), reliability (ie, internal consistency), construct validity, reproducibility (ie, test-retest reliability, agreement and smallest detectable change (SDC)) and responsiveness were determined.

RESULTS

Internal consistency was inadequate for the AOFAS-DLV total scale (α=0.585), but adequate for the function subscale (α=0.863). The questionnaire had adequate construct validity (82.4% of predefined hypotheses were confirmed), but inadequate longitudinal validity (70.6%). No floor effects were found, but ceiling effects were present in all AOFAS-DLV (sub)scales, most pronounced from 6 to 24 months after trauma onwards. Responsiveness was only adequate for the pain and alignment subscales, with a SDC of 1.7 points.

CONCLUSIONS

The AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Scale DLV has adequate construct validity and is reliable, making it a suitable instrument for cross-sectional studies investigating functional outcome in patients with a hindfoot fracture. The inadequate longitudinal validity and responsiveness, however, hamper the use of the questionnaire in longitudinal studies and for assessing long-term functional outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR5613; Post-results.

Minimal important change and other measurement properties of the Oxford Elbow Score and the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand in patients with a simple elbow dislocation; validation study alongside the multicenter FuncSiE trial

Study design

Validation study using data from a multicenter, randomized, clinical trial (RCT).

Objectives

To evaluate the reliability, validity, responsiveness, and minimal important change (MIC) of the Dutch version of the Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Quick-DASH) in patients with a simple elbow dislocation.

Background

Patient-reported outcome measures are increasingly important for assessing outcome following elbow injuries, both in daily practice and in clinical research. However measurement properties of the OES and Quick-DASH in these patients are not fully known.

Methods

OES and Quick-DASH were completed four times until one year after trauma. Mayo Elbow Performance Index, pain (VAS), Short Form-36, and EuroQol-5D were completed for comparison. Data of a multicenter RCT (n = 100) were used. Internal consistency was determined using Cronbach’s alpha. Construct and longitudinal validity were assessed by determining hypothesized strength of correlation between scores or changes in scores, respectively, of (sub)scales. Finally, floor and ceiling effects, MIC, and smallest detectable change (SDC) were determined.

Results

OES and Quick-DASH demonstrated adequate internal consistency (Cronbach α, 0.882 and 0.886, respectively). Construct validity and longitudinal validity of both scales were supported by >75% correctly hypothesized correlations. MIC and SDC were 8.2 and 12.0 point for OES, respectively. For Quick-DASH, these values were 11.7 and 25.0, respectively.

Conclusions

OES and Quick-DASH are reliable, valid, and responsive instruments for evaluating elbow-related quality of life. The anchor-based MIC was 8.2 points for OES and 11.7 for Quick-DASH.

The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle-Hindfoot Scale; translation and validation of the Dutch language version for ankle fractures

OBJECTIVES

The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale is among the most commonly used instruments for measuring outcome of treatment in patients who sustained a complex ankle or hindfoot injury. It consists of a patient-reported and a physician-reported part. A validated, Dutch version of this instrument is currently not available. The aim of this study was to translate the instrument into Dutch and to determine the measurement properties of the AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Scale Dutch language version (DLV) in patients with a unilateral ankle fracture.

SETTING

Multicentre (two Dutch hospitals), prospective observational study.

PARTICIPANTS

In total, 142 patients with a unilateral ankle fracture were included. Ten patients were lost to follow-up.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients completed the subjective (patient-reported) part of the AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Scale-DLV. A physician or trained physician-assistant completed the physician-reported part. For comparison and evaluation of the measuring characteristics, the Foot Function Index and the Short Form-36 were completed by the patient. Descriptive statistics (including floor and ceiling effects), reliability (ie, internal consistency), construct validity, reproducibility (ie, test-retest reliability, agreement and smallest detectable change) and responsiveness were determined.

RESULTS

The AOFAS-DLV and its subscales showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's α >0.90). Construct validity and longitudinal validity were proven to be adequate (76.5% of predefined hypotheses were confirmed). Floor effects were not present. Ceiling effects were present from 6 months onwards, as expected. Responsiveness was adequate, with a smallest detectable change of 12.0 points.

CONCLUSIONS

The AOFAS-DLV is a reliable, valid and responsive measurement instrument for evaluating functional outcome in patients with a unilateral ankle fracture. This implies that the questionnaire is suitable to compare different treatment modalities within this population or to compare outcome across hospitals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5613; 05-jan-2016).

Unstable simple elbow dislocations: medium-term results after non-surgical and surgical treatment

PURPOSE

Determination of the appropriate treatment of unstable simple elbow dislocations is difficult and a topic of ongoing discussion. The aim of this study was to analyse the outcome and complications after surgery and conservative treatment, with special focus on post-traumatic joint laxity.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 118 consecutive patients with simple elbow dislocations underwent stability testing by fluoroscopy after joint reduction and were assigned to groups 1 (slight), 2 (moderate) or 3 (gross) depending on post-traumatic joint laxity. All patients of group 1 underwent conservative treatment, and of group 3 primary ligament repair. In patients with moderate elbow laxity, the treatment was decided individually. All patients underwent a similar functional rehabilitation programme during treatment. Clinical outcome was determined after an average of 3.4 ± 1.5 years using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), and treatment-associated complications and revisions were recorded.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients (41.5 %) were assigned to group 1, 41 patients (34.7 %) to group 2 and 28 patients (23.7 %) to group 3. In group 2, 22 patients underwent ligament repair, while 19 patients were treated conservatively. On average, an excellent MEPS was achieved in group 1 after conservative treatment (MEPS 95.8 ± 9.0), similar to results after ligament repair of grossly unstable elbows in group 3 (91.6 ± 11.7). Interestingly, in group 2 conservative treatment was associated with a slightly lower MEPS (90.0 vs. 95.7), and significantly fewer patients achieved an excellent MEPS (81.8 vs. 52.6 %, p = 0.045). Similarly, conservative treatment in group 2 was associated with a fivefold to sixfold risk of complications (p = 0.032) and revision surgery (p = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the notion that patients with slight elbow laxity can be treated non-operatively, while primary surgical treatment should be performed in patients with moderate and gross laxity to avoid post-traumatic sequelae and decrease revision rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective Cohort Study, Level III.

American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Score: a study protocol for the translation and validation of the Dutch language version

INTRODUCTION

The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Score is among the most commonly used instruments for measuring the outcome of treatment in patients who sustained a complex ankle or hindfoot injury. It combines a clinician-reported and a patient-reported part. A valid Dutch version of this instrument is currently not available. Such a translated and validated instrument would allow objective comparison across hospitals or between patient groups, and with shown validity and reliability it may become a quality of care indicator in future. The main aims of this study are to translate and culturally adapt the AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Score questionnaire into Dutch according to international guidelines, and to evaluate the measurement properties of the AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Score-Dutch language version (DLV) in patients with a unilateral ankle or hindfoot fracture.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The design of the study will be a multicentre prospective observational study (case series) in patients who presented to the emergency department with a unilateral ankle or hindfoot fracture or (fracture) dislocation. A research physician or research assistant will complete the AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Score-DLV based on interview for the subjective part and a physical examination for the objective part. In addition, patients will be asked to complete the Foot Function Index (FFI) and the Short Form-36 (SF-36). Descriptive statistics (including floor and ceiling effects), internal consistency, construct validity, reproducibility (ie, test-retest reliability, agreement and smallest detectable change) and responsiveness will be assessed for the AOFAS DLV.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been exempted by the Medical Research Ethics Committee (MREC) Erasmus MC (Rotterdam, the Netherlands). Each participant will provide written consent to participate and remain anonymised during the study. The results of the study are planned to be published in an international, peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR5613. pre-result.

Functional recovery after treatment of extra-articular distal radius fractures in the elderly using the IlluminOss® System (IO-Wrist); a multicenter prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Approximately 17 % of all fractures involve the distal radius. Two-thirds require reduction due to displacement. High redislocation rates and functional disability remain a significant problem after non-operative treatment, with up to 30 % of patients suffering long-term functional restrictions. Whether operative correction is superior to non-operative treatment with respect to functional outcome has not unequivocally been confirmed. The IlluminOss® System was introduced in 2009 as a novel, patient-specific, and minimally invasive intramedullary fracture fixation. This minimally invasive technique has a much lower risk of iatrogenic soft tissue complications. Because IlluminOss® allows for early mobilization, it may theoretically lead to earlier functional recovery and ADL independence than non-operative immobilization. The main aim of this study is to examine outcome in elderly patients who sustained a unilateral, displaced, extra-articular distal radius fracture that was treated with IlluminOss®.

METHODS/DESIGN

The design of the study will be a multicenter, prospective, observational study (case series). The study population comprises elderly (60 years or older; independent in activities of daily living) with a unilateral, displaced, extra-articular distal radius fracture (AO/OTA type 23-A2 and A3) that after successful closed reduction was fixed within 2 weeks after the injury with IlluminOss®. Critical elements of treatment will be registered, and outcome will be monitored until 1 year after surgery. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score will serve as primary outcome measure. The Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation score, level of pain, health-related quality of life (Short Form-36 and EuroQoL-5D), time to ADL independence, time to activities/work resumption, range of motion of the wrist, radiological outcome, and complications are secondary outcome measures. Health care consumption and lost productivity will be used for a cost analysis. The cost analysis will be performed from a societal perspective. Descriptive data will be reported.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study will provide evidence on the effectiveness of operative treatment of patients who sustained an extra-articular distal radius fracture with the IlluminOss® System, using clinical, patient-reported, and societal outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register ( NTR5457 ; 29-sep-2015).

Early mobilisation versus plaster immobilisation of simple elbow dislocations: results of the FuncSiE multicentre randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND/AIM

To compare outcome of early mobilisation and plaster immobilisation in patients with a simple elbow dislocation. We hypothesised that early mobilisation would result in earlier functional recovery.

METHODS

From August 2009 to September 2012, 100 adult patients with a simple elbow dislocation were enrolled in this multicentre randomised controlled trial. Patients were randomised to early mobilisation (n=48) or 3 weeks plaster immobilisation (n=52). Primary outcome measure was the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Quick-DASH) score. Secondary outcomes were the Oxford Elbow Score, Mayo Elbow Performance Index, pain, range of motion, complications and activity resumption. Patients were followed for 1 year.

RESULTS

Quick-DASH scores at 1 year were 4.0 (95% CI 0.9 to 7.1) points in the early mobilisation group versus 4.2 (95% CI 1.2 to 7.2) in the plaster immobilisation group. At 6 weeks, early mobilised patients reported less disability (Quick-DASH 12 (95% CI 9 to 15) points vs 19 (95% CI 16 to 22); p<0.05) and had a larger arc of flexion and extension (121° (95% CI 115° to 127°) vs 102° (95% CI 96° to 108°); p<0.05). Patients returned to work sooner after early mobilisation (10 vs 18 days; p=0.020). Complications occurred in 12 patients; this was unrelated to treatment. No recurrent dislocations occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Early active mobilisation is a safe and effective treatment for simple elbow dislocations. Patients recovered faster and returned to work earlier without increasing the complication rate. No evidence was found supporting treatment benefit at 1 year.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR 2025.

The treatment of simple elbow dislocation in adults

BACKGROUND

Simple elbow dislocation is a complex soft-tissue injury that can cause permanent symptoms. Its incidence is 5 to 6 cases per 100 000 persons per year. Its proper treatment is debated; options range from immobilization in a cast to surgical intervention.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed the literature on the treatment of simple elbow dislocation and performed a meta-analysis, primarily on the basis of clinical scores and secondarily with respect to pain, range of motion, and return to work.

RESULTS

A randomized controlled trial (RCT) showed that clinical results at short-term follow-up were superior for early functional treatment compared to immobilization in a cast. Brief immobilization, however, reduced pain initially, and the long-term results of early mobilization and immobilization in a cast were the same. Our meta-analysis showed that early mobilization enables patients to return to work earlier (difference of mean values -2.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.18 to -2.64), and that the extent of soft-tissue injury is correlated with the clinical outcome (inverse relationship; difference of mean values -12.07, 95% CI -23.88 to -0.26). Surgical and conservative treatment were compared in a single RCT, which revealed no significant difference in outcomes. A meta-analysis of two retrospective comparative studies showed no advantage of immediate ligament repair over delayed surgery.

CONCLUSION

Early functional treatment is the evidence-based therapeutic standard for simple elbow dislocation. The past few years have seen further developments in surgery for simple elbow dislocation. Further study is needed to determine whether surgery for elbow dislocation with high-grade instability can prevent persistent pain, limitation of motion, and chronic instability.

Caudal Elbow Luxation in a Dog Managed by Temporary Transarticular External Skeletal Fixation

This case report details a caudal unilateral traumatic elbow luxation in a 4-year-old male neutered Labrador following a road traffic trauma. This is a highly unusual injury in the dog. The pathogenesis and successful treatment by closed reduction followed by stabilisation with a temporary transarticular external skeletal fixator are discussed. The dog was assessed at 4 weeks and 6 months after surgery. Findings at 6 months after treatment demonstrated a normal gait with no pain or crepitation. A mild amount of soft tissue thickening around the elbow was noted. The range of motion of the elbow was limited to 45 degrees of flexion and 150 degrees of extension. This is the first case of a traumatic caudal luxation of the elbow in a dog described in the English veterinary literature and the first report of successful management of an elbow luxation in a dog by closed reduction and temporary transarticular fixation.

Acute traumatic posterior elbow dislocation in children

Traumatic posterior dislocation of the elbow is often associated with significant morbidity and incomplete recovery. The aim of this study was to retrospectively analyse the outcome of 33 children (median age 10.8 years). Patients underwent reduction and assessment of stability under general anaesthesia. Pure dislocations (n=10) were immobilized, whereas unstable fractures (n=23) were stabilized. Refixation of ligaments was performed if stability was not achieved by fracture stabilization alone. Immobilization was continued for 26 (pure dislocations) or 35 days (associated injuries), respectively. Results were excellent (n=9) or good (n=1) after pure dislocation. Results were excellent (n=15), good (n=7) or poor (n=1) in children with associated injuries. Accurate diagnosis, concentric stable reduction of the elbow as well as stable osteosynthesis of displaced fractures are associated with good results in children with acute posterior elbow dislocations.

Interventions for treating acute elbow dislocations in adults

BACKGROUND

Dislocation of the elbow joint is a relatively uncommon injury.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of various forms of treatment for acute simple elbow dislocations in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (April 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, 2011 Issue 1), MEDLINE (1948 to March Week 5 2011), EMBASE (1980 to 2011 Week 14), PEDro (April 2011), CINAHL (April 2011), various trial registers, various conference proceedings and bibliographies of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of conservative and surgical treatment of dislocations of the elbow in adults. Excluded were trials involving dislocations with associated fractures, except for avulsion fractures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were independently performed by two review authors. There was no pooling of data.

MAIN RESULTS

Two small randomised controlled trials, involving a total of 80 participants with simple elbow dislocations, were included. Both trials were methodologically flawed and potentially biased.One trial, involving 50 participants, compared early mobilisation at three days post reduction versus cast immobilisation. At one year follow-up, the recovery of range of motion appeared better in the early mobilisation group (e.g. participants with incomplete recovery of extension: 1/24 versus 5/26; risk ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.03 to 1.72). However, the results were not statistically significant. There were no reports of instability or recurrence. One person in each group had residual pain at one year.The other trial, involving 30 participants, compared surgical repair of the torn ligaments versus conservative treatment (cast immobilisation for two weeks). At final follow-up (mean 27.5 months), there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in the numbers of patients who considered their injured elbow to be inferior to their non-injured elbow (10/14 versus 7/14; RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.66) or in other patient complaints about their elbow such as weakness, pain or weather-related discomfort. There were no reports of instability or recurrence. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in range of motion of the elbow (extension, flexion, pronation, and supination) or grip strength at follow-up. No participants had neurological disturbances of the hand but two surgical group participants had recurrent dislocation of the ulnar nerve (no other details provided). One person in each group had radiologically detected myositis ossificans (bone formation within muscles following injury).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence from randomised controlled trials to determine which method of treatment is the most appropriate for simple dislocations of the elbow in adults. Although weak and inconclusive, the available evidence from a trial comparing surgery versus conservative treatment does not suggest that the surgical repair of elbow ligaments for simple elbow dislocation improves long-term function. Future research should focus on questions relating to non-surgical treatment, such as the duration of immobilisation.

The reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Dutch version of the Oxford elbow score

Background

The Oxford elbow score (OES) is an English questionnaire that measures the patients' subjective experience of elbow surgery. The OES comprises three domains: elbow function, pain, and social-psychological effects. This questionnaire can be completed by the patient and used as an outcome measure after elbow surgery. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate the Dutch version of the translated OES for reliability, validity and responsiveness with respect to patients after elbow trauma and surgery.

Methods

The 12 items of the English-language OES were translated into Dutch and then back-translated; the back-translated questionnaire was then compared to the original English version. The OES Dutch version was completed by 69 patients (group A), 60 of whom had an elbow luxation, four an elbow fracture and five an epicondylitis. QuickDASH, the visual analogue pain scale (VAS) and the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) were also completed to examine the convergent validity of the OES in group A. To calculate the test-retest reliability and responsiveness of the OES, this questionnaire was completed three times by 43 different patients (group B). An average of 52 days elapsed between therapy and the administration of the third OES (SD = 24.1).

Results

The Cronbach's α coefficients for the function, pain and social-psychological domains were 0.90, 0.87 and 0.90, respectively. The intra-class correlation coefficients for the domains were 0.87 for function, 0.89 for pain and 0.87 for social-psychological. The standardised response means for the domains were 0.69, 0.46 and 0.60, respectively, and the minimal detectable changes were 27.6, 21.7 and 24.0, respectively. The convergent validity for the function, pain and social-psychological domains, which were measured as the Spearman's correlation of the OES domains with the MEPI, were 0.68, 0.77 and 0.77, respectively. The Spearman's correlations of the OES domains with QuickDASH were -0.43, -0.44 and -0.47, respectively, and the Spearman's correlations with the VAS were -0.33, -0.38 and -0.42, respectively.

Conclusions

The Dutch OES is a reliable and valid 12-item questionnaire that can be completed within several minutes by patients with elbow injuries. This Dutch questionnaire was useful as an outcome measure in patients with elbow trauma.