Journals / Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi / 2012 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 6

Akut dirsek travmasından sonra aktif eklem hareket açıklığının korunması radyografi gerekliliğini ortadan kaldırır mı?

Does preservation of active range of motion after acute elbow injury rule out the need for radiography?

Pages
479–482
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

CONCLUSION Patients with elbow injury and a limited ROM in all di- rections of flexion, extension, supination and pronation re- quire further X-ray investigations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:BACKGROUND We aimed to evaluate the role of a normal elbow active range of motion (ROM) in predicting low fracture risk and avoiding elbow X-ray in patients with acute elbow injuries.
📊
Key Findings & Data:RESULTS Elbow fractures were identified in 10 of the 102 enrolled patients (9.8%).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:CONCLUSION Patients with elbow injury and a limited ROM in all di- rections of flexion, extension, supination and pronation re- quire further X-ray investigations.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

BACKGROUND We aimed to evaluate the role of a normal elbow active range of motion (ROM) in predicting low fracture risk and avoiding elbow X-ray in patients with acute elbow injuries. Lack of any approved rules for this purpose led us to evalu- ate simple physical examination methods to predict elbow fractures. METHODS In this observational study, all patients with elbow injury who presented to two emergency departments were enrolled according to specific criteria. Patients were examined by emergency or orthopedics residents. Elbow radiographs were reviewed by a radiologist for fractures and soft tissue injuries. Results of the clinical examination and radiographs were recorded for statistical analysis. Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. RESULTS Elbow fractures were identified in 10 of the 102 enrolled patients (9.8%). Nine of the 10 had limited ROM in all movements. Limited active elbow ROM in predicting elbow fracture revealed a sensitivity of 90%, specificity of 92%, and positive and negative predictive values of 56% and 98%, respectively. Individuals with limitation in one or two directions had no signs of fracture in the X-rays. CONCLUSION Patients with elbow injury and a limited ROM in all di- rections of flexion, extension, supination and pronation re- quire further X-ray investigations.

Özet

AMAÇ Akut dirsek travması geçiren hastalarda düşük kırık riskini öngörme ve dirseğin radyografik görüntülemesinden vazgeçmede normal aktif eklem hareket açıklığı (ROM) rolünü değerlendirmektir. Bu amaçla kabul edilen kuralların olmaması bizi dirsek kırıklarını öngörmede basit fiziksel inceleme yöntemlerini değerlendirmeye sevk etti. GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM Bu gözlemsel çalışmada dirsek travmasıyla iki acil servise gelen hastaların tümü spesifik ölçütlere göre çalışmaya alındı. Hastalar acil servis veya ortopedi asistanları tarafından incelendi. Dirsek radyografileri bir radyolog tarafından kırıklar ve yumuşak doku yaralanmaları açısından gözden geçirildi. İstatistiksel analiz için klinik inceleme ve radyografi sonuçları kaydedildi. Özgüllük, duyarlılık, pozitif ve negatif öngördürcü değerler hesaplandı. BULGULAR Çalışmaya alınan 102 hastanın 10’unda (%9,8) dirsek kırıkları tanımlandı. On hastanın 9’unda her dirsek hareketi (ROM) kısıtlanmıştı. Dirsek kırığını öngörmede kısıtlanmış aktif dirsek ROM’un duyarlılık, özgüllük, pozitif ve negatif öngördürücü değerleri sırasıyla %90, %92, %56 ve % 98 şeklindeydi. Bir veya iki yöne hareketlerde kısıtlaması olan kişilerin radyografilerinde hiçbir kırık belirtisi yoktu. SONUÇ Dirsek travması geçirmiş, her yöne fleksiyon, ekstansiyon, supinasyon ve pronasyon hareketlerinde ROM’u kısıtlanmış hastalara ayrıca radyografisini çekmek gerekmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

AMIRI, H., VAHDATI, S. S., FEKRI, S., ZADEGAN, S. A., SHOKOOHI, H., RAHIMI-MOVAGHAR, V. (2012). Akut dirsek travmasından sonra aktif eklem hareket açıklığının korunması radyografi gerekliliğini ortadan kaldırır mı?. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 6, 479–482. https://ajindex.com/articles/323911

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Lennon RI, Riyat MS, Hilliam R, Anathkrishnan G, Alderson G. Can a normal range of elbow movement predict a normal elbow x ray? Emerg Med J 2007;24:86-8
  2. Freed HA, Shields NN. Most frequently overlooked radiographically apparent fractures in a teaching hospital emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 1984;13:900-4
  3. Wei CJ, Tsai WC, Tiu CM, Wu HT, Chiou HJ, Chang CY. Systematic analysis of missed extremity fractures in emergency radiology. Acta Radiol 2006;47:710-7
  4. Stiell IG, Greenberg GH, McKnight RD, Nair RC, McDow- ell I, Reardon M, et al. Decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries. Refinement and prospective validation. JAMA 1993;269:1127-32
  5. Stiell IG, Greenberg GH, Wells GA, McDowell I, Cwinn AA, Smith NA, et al. Prospective validation of a decision rule for the use of radiography in acute knee injuries. JAMA 1996;275:611-5
  6. Stiell IG, Greenberg GH, McKnight RD, Nair RC, McDow- ell I, Worthington JR. A study to develop clinical decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries. Ann Emerg Med 1992;21:384-90
  7. Stiell IG, Wells GA, McDowell I, Greenberg GH, McKnight RD, Cwinn AA, et al. Use of radiography in acute knee injuries: need for clinical decision rules. Acad Emerg Med 1995;2:966-73
  8. Stiell IG, Wells GA, Vandemheen KL, Clement CM, Lesiuk H, De Maio VJ, et al. The Canadian C-spine rule for radiography in alert and stable trauma patients. JAMA 2001;286:1841-8
  9. Seaberg DC, Jackson R. Clinical decision rule for knee radiographs. Am J Emerg Med 1994;12:541-3
  10. Darracq MA, Vinson DR, Panacek EA. Preservation of active range of motion after acute elbow trauma predicts ab- sence of elbow fracture. Am J Emerg Med 2008;26:779-82
  11. Hawksworth CR, Freeland P. Inability to fully extend the injured elbow: an indicator of significant injury. Arch Emerg Med 1991;8:253-6
  12. Appelboam A, Reuben AD, Benger JR, Beech F, Dutson J, Haig S, et al. Elbow extension test to rule out elbow fracture: multicentre, prospective validation and observational study of diagnostic accuracy in adults and children. BMJ 2008;337:2428
  13. Lamprakis A, Vlasis K, Siampou E, Grammatikopoulos I, Lionis C. Can elbow-extension test be used as an alternative to radiographs in primary care? Eur J Gen Pract 2007;13:221- 4
  14. Docherty MA, Schwab RA, Ma OJ. Can elbow extension be used as a test of clinically significant injury? South Med J 2002;95:539-41.