The Effect of Immobilization Position on Functional Outcomes and Complications Associated With the Conservative Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures: A Systematic Review

Abstract

PurposeWe evaluated the literature on complications associated with different positions used for immobilizing the upper extremity during conservative treatment of distal radius fractures (DRF).MethodsA search of PubMed, Embase, and Medline was conducted to identify original research on the effects that upper extremity positioning during the treatment of DRFs has on complication rates. Treatment groups were categorized by wrist positioning in flexion, extension, or neutral, as well as forearm positioning in pronation, supination, or neutral. The primary endpoints examined included the loss of reduction, recasting/refabricating an orthosis, and functional limitations.ResultsA total of 1,655 articles were identified through an initial database search. Ultimately, 8 studies, with 786 total patients, met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. A qualitative analysis determined that immobilizing DRFs with the wrist in extension results in better functional and radiographic outcomes with lower rates of complications, such as pain, recasting, and the need for operation. The 2 studies that compared forearm pronation versus supination revealed contradictory results regarding which position was associated with superior outcomes. A meta-analysis comparing the various wrist and forearm positions failed to demonstrate statistically significant differences in the rates of loss of reduction or recasting/refabricating an orthosis between the groups. This analysis was limited by considerable heterogeneity in the data from the different studies.ConclusionsDespite the high incidence of DRFs, there is limited research on the optimal position of immobilization for conservative treatment of them. Available evidence suggests that the wrist should be immobilized in extension, as these patients had improved functional and radiographic outcomes. No conclusion can be drawn from the existing literature on ideal forearm position during immobilization. This review also suggests better data reporting practices for studies researching DRFs, so that future meta-analyses can be more comprehensive.Type of study/level of evidenceTherapeutic II.