Fracture Classification - Orthopaedic Trauma - Lecture Slides, Slides of Orthopedics

Fracture Classification, Interobserver Reliability, Lauge Hansen and Weber, Garden Classification, Femoral Neck Fractures, Closed Fractures, Tscherne Classification, Superficial Contusions are some points from this lecture. This lecture is for Orthopaedics Trauma course. This lecture is part of a complete lectures series on the course you can find in my uploaded files.

Typology: Slides

2011/2012

Uploaded on 12/21/2012

devaki
devaki 🇮🇳

4.3

(23)

122 documents

1 / 38

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Fracture Classification
Docsity.com
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9
pfa
pfd
pfe
pff
pf12
pf13
pf14
pf15
pf16
pf17
pf18
pf19
pf1a
pf1b
pf1c
pf1d
pf1e
pf1f
pf20
pf21
pf22
pf23
pf24
pf25
pf26

Partial preview of the text

Download Fracture Classification - Orthopaedic Trauma - Lecture Slides and more Slides Orthopedics in PDF only on Docsity!

Fracture Classification

Why Classify?

  • As a treatment guide
  • To assist with prognosis
  • To speak a common language with others in order to compare results

To Assist with Prognosis

  • You can tell the patient what to expect with the results
  • PROBLEM: Does not consider the soft tissues or other compounding factors

To Speak A Common Language

  • This will allow results to be compared
  • PROBLEM: Poor interobserver reliability with existing fracture classifications

Intraobserver Reliability

For a given fracture, each physician

should produce the same

classification

Literature

  • 94 patients with ankle fractures
  • 4 observers
  • Classify according to Lauge Hansen and Weber
  • Evaluated the precision (observer’s agreement with each other)

Thomsen et al, JBJS-Br, 1991

Literature

  • 100 femoral neck fractures
  • 8 observers
  • Garden’s classification
    • Classified identical 22/
    • Disagreement b/t displaced and non- displaced in 45
    • Conclude poor ability to stage with this system

Frandsen, JBJS-B, 1988

Closed Fractures

  • Fracture is not exposed to the environment
  • All fractures have some degree of soft tissue

injury

  • Commonly classified according to the

Tscherne classification

  • Don’t underestimate the soft tissue injury as

this affects treatment and outcome!

Tscherne Classification

  • Grade 0
    • Minimal soft tissue injury
    • Indirect injury
      • Grade 1
        • Injury from within
        • Superficial contusions or abrasions

Tscherne Classification

  • Grade 2
  • Direct injury
  • More extensive soft tissue injury with muscle contusion, skin abrasions
  • More severe bone injury (usually)

Literature

  • Prospective study
  • Tibial shaft fractures treated by intramedullary nail
  • Open and closed
  • 100 patients

Gaston, JBJS-B, 1999

Literature

What predicts outcome? Classifications used:

  • AO
  • Gustilo
  • Tscherne
  • Winquist-Hansen (comminution)

All x-rays reviewed by single physician Evaluated outcomes Union Additional surgery Infection Tscherne classification more predictive of outcome than others

Gaston, JBJS-B, 1999

Open Fractures

  • Commonly described by the Gustilo system
  • Model is tibia fractures
  • Routinely applied to all types of open

fractures

  • Gustilo emphasis on size of skin injury

Open Fractures

  • Gustilo classification used for prognosis
  • Fracture healing, infection and amputation rate correlate with the degree of soft tissue injury by Gustilo
  • Fractures should be classified in the operating room at the time of initial debridement - Evaluate periosteal stripping - Consider soft tissue injury