Distal radius fractures-Regional variation in treatment regimens

After recent technical innovations of fracture surgery implants, treatment traditions are changing for distal radius fractures, the most common orthopaedic injury. The aim of this study was to determine if the choice of surgical method for treatment of distal radius fractures differ between healthca...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inPloS one Vol. 13; no. 11; p. e0207702
Main Authors Saving, Jenny, Ponzer, Sari, Enocson, Anders, Mellstrand Navarro, Cecilia
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States Public Library of Science 2018
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:After recent technical innovations of fracture surgery implants, treatment traditions are changing for distal radius fractures, the most common orthopaedic injury. The aim of this study was to determine if the choice of surgical method for treatment of distal radius fractures differ between healthcare regions in Sweden. The study was based on all (n = 22 378) adult patients who were registered with a surgical procedure due to a distal radius fracture during 2010-2013 in Sweden. Consecutive data was collected from the Swedish National Patient Registry. The proportions of use of surgical method varied among the 21 healthcare regions between 41% and 95% for internal fixation, between 2.3% and 44% for percutaneous fixation and between 0.6% and 19% for external fixation. Differences between regions were statistically significant in all but 6 comparisons when controlled for age and gender. Incidence rates of surgical treatment of a distal radius fracture varied between 4.2 and 9.2/10 000 person-years. We conclude that there is a large variation in operative management of distal radius fractures between Swedish healthcare regions.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0207702