Pregled bibliografske jedinice broj: 729222
Similarities and differences of selected clinical variables of AO/ASIF 31-B2.1 and 31- A1.1 fracture patients
Similarities and differences of selected clinical variables of AO/ASIF 31-B2.1 and 31- A1.1 fracture patients // 34th SICOT Orthopaedic World Congress: abstracts book: e-posters
Hyderābād, Indija, 2013. str. 58-58 (poster, međunarodna recenzija, sažetak, stručni)
CROSBI ID: 729222 Za ispravke kontaktirajte CROSBI podršku putem web obrasca
Naslov
Similarities and differences of selected
clinical variables of AO/ASIF 31-B2.1 and 31-
A1.1 fracture patients
Autori
Gašpar, Drago ; Crnković, Tomislav
Vrsta, podvrsta i kategorija rada
Sažeci sa skupova, sažetak, stručni
Izvornik
34th SICOT Orthopaedic World Congress: abstracts book: e-posters
/ - , 2013, 58-58
Skup
34th SICOT Orthopaedic World Congress
Mjesto i datum
Hyderābād, Indija, 17.11.2013. - 19.11.2013
Vrsta sudjelovanja
Poster
Vrsta recenzije
Međunarodna recenzija
Ključne riječi
fractures
Sažetak
Aim: To determine similarities and differences of clinical variables attributed to patients who sustained AO/ASIF 31-B2.1 or 31-A1.1 fractures for the purposes of a more reliable choice of implants used to treat the two radiologically similar and adjacent fractures. Methods: We analysed hip fractures patients surgically treated between the beginning of 2001 and the end of 2010 in traumatology department, General County Hospital of Požega, Croatia, who sustained the 31-B2.1 and 31-A1.1 type fractures due to a simplefall, and who were 65 or older. Reviewed variables comprise: age, gender, body mass index (BMI), ADL (activities of daily living) -Katz score prior to the injury, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, implant type used, verticalization and early mobilisation assessment conforming to an original scale. Results: Age, BMI was statistical significance mostly different (p<0.001), then the gender, ADL score, assessment of verticalisation (p<0.05). Five different implant types were used, in both groups differently (p<0.05). No statistically significant differences between the ASA score of fractured group of patients (p=0.2). Conclusion: The 31-B2.1 and 31-A1.1 classifications differ in respect of the selected clinical variables, while remaining nearlyindistinguishable in pre-operative radiological diagnostic results. A synthesis of the radiological results and clinical pictures defined by the selected variables facilitates a more uniform and more reliable application of recommended implants in cases of doubt regarding the AO/ASIF 31-B2.1 and 31-A1 fractures.
Izvorni jezik
Engleski
Znanstvena područja
Kliničke medicinske znanosti
POVEZANOST RADA
Ustanove:
Opća županijska bolnica Požega