Journals / Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 2

The epidemiology of adult fractures according to the AO/OTA fracture classification

Pages
209–216
Publication Date
2022-11-06
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)

Overall mortality rate was 0.4%.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:BACKGROUND: The epidemiology of adult fractures has been changing timely, in a multifactorial fashion.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The aim of this study was to put forward a recent 5-year epidemiological analysis of adult fractures, according to the current AO/OTA fracture classification, in the current decade of action for road safety.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall mortality rate was 0.4%.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The epidemiology of adult fractures has been changing timely, in a multifactorial fashion. The aim of this study was to put forward a recent 5-year epidemiological analysis of adult fractures, according to the current AO/OTA fracture classification, in the current decade of action for road safety. METHODS: 5324 adult patients who were diagnosed with at least one fracture related with orthopedics and traumatology in a lev el-one trauma center were included in this retrospective, epidemiological descriptive study. The patients were grouped according to their ages as; 18–35, 36–55, 56–69, and ≥70. The fractures were examined according to the AO/OTA classification. RESULTS: 5865 fractures were present in 5324 patients. The mean age of the patients was 48.6±21.5. The number of patients ac cording to the age groups was as follows; 1947 (36.6%), 1636 (30.7%), 881 (16.5%), and 860 (16.2%), respectively. The most frequent three fractures according to the AO/OTA fracture classification were; 7 (hand 19.6%), 23 (distal forearm, 12.1%), and 8 (foot, 11.8%). About 54.4% and 45.4% of the patients were treated non-surgically and surgically, respectively. About 0.2% of the patients preferred an alternative treatment. Overall mortality rate was 0.4%. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this study represents the first analysis of adult fractures according to the AO/OTA classification, over a 5-year period. As a future prospect, further multi-centric epidemiological studies are warranted to constitute a sustainable action plan for the prevention of major traumas.

🔖

Cite This Article

BİLGE, O., DÜNDAR, Z. D., ATILGAN, N., YAKA, H., KEKEÇ, A. F., KARAGÜVEN, D., DORAL, M. N. (2022). The epidemiology of adult fractures according to the AO/OTA fracture classification. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 2, 209–216. https://ajindex.com/articles/644039

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Krug EG, Sharma GK, Lozano R. The global burden of injuries. Am J Public Health 2000;90:523–6
  2. Mock C, Cherian MN. The global burden of musculoskeletal injuries: Challenges and solutions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008;466:2306–16
  3. Mehrpour SR, Nabian MH, Zanjani LO, Foroughmand-Araabi MH, Kamrani RS. Descriptive epidemiology of traumatic injuries in 18890 adults: A 5-year- study in a tertiary trauma center in Iran. Asian J Sports Med 2015;6:e23129
  4. Taylor A, Young A. Epidemiology of orthopaedic trauma admissions over one year in a district general hospital in England. Open Orthop J 2015;9:191–3
  5. Garbuz DS, Masri BA, Esdaile J, Duncan CP. Classification systems in orthopaedics. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2002;10:290–7
  6. Audigé L, Bhandari M, Griffin D, Middleton P, Reeves BC. Systematic reviews of nonrandomized clinical studies in the orthopaedic literature. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004;427:249–57
  7. Audigé L, Bhandari M, Hanson B, Kellam J. A concept for the validation of fracture classifications. J Orthop Trauma 2005;19:401–6
  8. Marsh JL, Slongo TF, Agel J, Broderick JS, Creevey W, DeCoster TA, et al. Fracture and dislocation classification compendium 2007: Orthopae dic trauma association classification, database and outcomes committee. J Orthop Trauma 2007;21 Suppl 10:1–163
  9. Meling T, Harboe K, Enoksen CH, Aarflot M, Arthursson AJ, Søreide K. How reliable and accurate is the AO/OTA comprehensive classification for adult long-bone fractures? J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2012;73:224– 31
  10. Audigé L, Bhandari M, Kellam J. How reliable are reliability studies of fracture classifications? A systematic review of their methodologies. Acta Orthop Scand 2004;75:184–94
  11. Lichtenhahn P, Fernandez DL, Schatzker J. Analysis of the “user friendli ness” of the AO classification of fractures. Helv Chir Acta 1992;58:919– 24
  12. Donaldson LJ, Cook A, Thomson RG. Incidence of fractures in a geographically defined population. J Epidemiol Community Health 1990;44:241–5
  13. Singer BR, McLauchlan GJ, Robinson CM, Christie J. Epidemiology of fractures in 15,000 adults: The influence of age and gender. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998;80:243–8
  14. Court-Brown CM, Caesar B. Epidemiology of adult fractures: A review. Injury 2006;37:691–7
  15. Samuel JC, Akinkutou A, Villaveces A, Charles AG, Lee CN, Hoffman IF, et al. Epidemiology of injuries at a tertiary care center in Malawi. World J Surg 2009;33:1836–41
  16. Weidauer L, Binkley T, Beare T, Minett M, McCormack L, Wey A