Abstract

BackgroundSurgical treatment of displaced distal radius fractures (DRF) in older patients has increased, despite lacking evidence of its superiority over non-operative treatment. How treatment choice affects these patients after the initial 12-month period remains unknown. This study presents a clinical and radiographic follow up at an average of 3 years after treatment in the context of a randomized clinical trial comparing outcomes in patients aged ≥70 years, with a dorsally displaced distal radius fracture treated either surgically with volar locking plate or non-operatively.MethodsBetween 2009 and 2017, 140 patients aged ≥70 years with dorsally displaced DRF were randomized to surgery with volar locking plate (VLP) or non-operative treatment. At an average of 3 years after inclusion the participants were invited to an additional follow-up. The primary outcome was Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE). Secondary outcomes included additional Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROM), grip strength, range of motion, complications and radiological results.ResultsSixty six patients were available for a 3 year follow-up, 33 in the non-operatively treated group and 33 in the VLP-group. The mean age at injury was 77 years. At 3 years the median PRWE was better (0 points) in the VLP-group than in the non-operative treatment group (9 points) p-value: 0.027. No statistically significant difference was found in Disabilities of the Arm, Hand, and Shoulder (DASH), EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) or grip strength. Total arc of range of motion was larger in the operatively treated group. No significant difference in osteoarthritis was found. Both groups had regained grip strength. The complication rate was similar. Outcomes improved from the 1 year to the 3 year follow-up.ConclusionsSurgery with volar locking plate gave less long-term disability compared to non-operative treatment for severely displaced distal radius fractures in patients aged ≥70 years. Our findings were statistically significant but in the lower range of clinical importance.Trial registrationThe study was registered at : NCT02154620 03/06/2014 and NCT01268397 30/12/2010. Ethical approval was obtained from Ethical Committee in Stockholm, Sweden (2009/37–31/3, 2013/105–31/2, 2014/1041–32, 2017/611–32).

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call