Results of treatment of mallet finger by internal splinting - a preliminary report.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
Mallet finger, although common represents a spectrum of injuries for which there are many questions about the best form of treatment. Many authors advocate orthopedic treatment which is less invasive but requires greater patients dedication to implement. Despite a great number of different sort of orthosis none has proved superiority. The method of internal splinting of the DIP joint is less troublesome for the patient uniting the assets of orthopedic and surgical treatment. The goal of the study is the evaluation of the above mentioned method.
MATERIAL AND
METHODS
Thirty three patients aged from 18 to 55 years (the same number of fingers) were treated by means of internal splinting of the DIP joint for mallet finger. Most of the lesions involved the middle finger (29 %), the lesion was mostly (54%) sustained during house-work; mean period from trauma to treatment was 3,8 weeks. The splinting was performed by means of 1-1,2 mm K wire, after applying Oberst's type of anesthesia. The stabilization was maintained for 8 weeks, then the patients were required to splint the joint for the period of 4 weeks.
RESULTS
The mean period of follow-up was months. Twenty four patients (72%) were examined. One patient had a K-wire removed after 4 weeks due to infection and the treatment was continued according to the time protocol by means of Stack's orthosis. No other complications were observed. The total active flexion of the affected digit was similar to the unaffected counterpart. The mean lag of extension was 5,68 degrees ; 31/33 (91%) fingers were rated excellent and good acc. to Miller scheme.
CONCLUSION
Internal splinting method of treatment of mallet finger is a recommendable alternative for other methods.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.