International journal of orthopaedic and trauma nursing · 2026
A multidisciplinary care pathway initiated during temporary external fixation for ankle and pilon fractures: A historical-control cohort study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Li Long, Huang Juan, Yan Han, Ye Xingxing, Lin Gan, Zeng Canjun, Jiang Feijuan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Temporary external fixation is commonly used before definitive fixation for unstable ankle and pilon fractures with malalignment, dislocation, or soft-tissue compromise. This waiting period may affect mobility, self-care, psychological status, and nursing workload, yet care is not standardized.
OBJECTIVE: This study examined whether a multidisciplinary care pathway initiated during temporary external fixation was associated with early functional independence, psychological status, comfort, 12-month ankle function, satisfaction, and complications.
METHODS: This single-center retrospective historical-control cohort included 52 adults treated with temporary external fixation followed by definitive internal fixation. A total of 26 patients received routine rehabilitation care, and 26 received the multidisciplinary care pathway. Activities of daily living, psychological status, and comfort were assessed on day 3 using the Barthel Index, Mental Status Scale in Non-psychiatric Settings, and General Comfort Questionnaire. AOFAS ankle-hindfoot score, satisfaction, and complications were assessed at 12 months. Adjusted models included age, smoking history, and fracture category.
RESULTS: The multidisciplinary pathway group had higher day-3 ADL scores (adjusted mean difference, 8.47; 95% CI, 3.86 to 13.08) and lower MSSNS scores (-11.93; 95% CI, -17.79 to -6.06). No clear between-group differences were observed in GCQ score, 12-month AOFAS score, or hospital stay. Satisfaction favored the multidisciplinary pathway group, although a ceiling effect limited interpretation. No pin-site infection or venous thromboembolic event occurred.
CONCLUSIONS: In this historical-control cohort, the multidisciplinary care pathway was associated with better early ADL and psychological-status scores. The study design, lack of baseline outcome measurements, and small sample size preclude causal inference.
OBJECTIVE: This study examined whether a multidisciplinary care pathway initiated during temporary external fixation was associated with early functional independence, psychological status, comfort, 12-month ankle function, satisfaction, and complications.
METHODS: This single-center retrospective historical-control cohort included 52 adults treated with temporary external fixation followed by definitive internal fixation. A total of 26 patients received routine rehabilitation care, and 26 received the multidisciplinary care pathway. Activities of daily living, psychological status, and comfort were assessed on day 3 using the Barthel Index, Mental Status Scale in Non-psychiatric Settings, and General Comfort Questionnaire. AOFAS ankle-hindfoot score, satisfaction, and complications were assessed at 12 months. Adjusted models included age, smoking history, and fracture category.
RESULTS: The multidisciplinary pathway group had higher day-3 ADL scores (adjusted mean difference, 8.47; 95% CI, 3.86 to 13.08) and lower MSSNS scores (-11.93; 95% CI, -17.79 to -6.06). No clear between-group differences were observed in GCQ score, 12-month AOFAS score, or hospital stay. Satisfaction favored the multidisciplinary pathway group, although a ceiling effect limited interpretation. No pin-site infection or venous thromboembolic event occurred.
CONCLUSIONS: In this historical-control cohort, the multidisciplinary care pathway was associated with better early ADL and psychological-status scores. The study design, lack of baseline outcome measurements, and small sample size preclude causal inference.