BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to construct an alternative classification system for occupational hand injuries based on etiologic mechanisms and to analyze the injury patterns resulting from various mechanisms. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients operated between January 2005 and December 2007 in two hand surgery units staffed by a team of hand surgeons was made. The patient files were retrospectively examined, and mechanisms causing the injuries were analyzed. Similar mechanisms were classified in the same groups, and the mechanism of injury was matched with type of injury often caused by this mechanism. In the classification of injuries, the tissues that were injured were taken as a basis for classification. 4120 upper extremity injuries were seen in the study hospitals, and 2188 (53.1%) of them were occupational injuries. There were 2063 males (94.3%) and 125 females (6.7%). The mean age was 28.2 (range: 15-71) years. RESULTS: Examination of the agents causing injury yielded 62 agents. Further examination of these agents showed that the mechanism by which they caused injury was similar in some agents, and these agents were placed in the same groups, which constituted the Etiologic Classification of Hand Injuries (ECOHI) classification. These groups of mechanisms were: cutting-penetrating, cutting-crushing, crushing-penetrating, crushing-compressing, crushing-burning, stinging, avulsing, electrical current, and chemical injuries and miscellaneous burns. The two most common mechanisms were crushing-compressing and cutting-crushing types, constituting 744 (34.0%) and 514 (23.5%) of injuries, respectively. CONCLUSION: We believe that ECOHI is important to form a common language for the classification of etiologic factors.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to construct an alternative classification system for occupational hand injuries based on etiologic mechanisms and to analyze the injury patterns resulting from various mechanisms. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients operated between January 2005 and December 2007 in two hand surgery units staffed by a team of hand surgeons was made. The patient files were retrospectively examined, and mechanisms causing the injuries were analyzed. Similar mechanisms were classified in the same groups, and the mechanism of injury was matched with type of injury often caused by this mechanism. In the classification of injuries, the tissues that were injured were taken as a basis for classification. 4120 upper extremity injuries were seen in the study hospitals, and 2188 (53.1%) of them were occupational injuries. There were 2063 males (94.3%) and 125 females (6.7%). The mean age was 28.2 (range: 15-71) years. RESULTS: Examination of the agents causing injury yielded 62 agents. Further examination of these agents showed that the mechanism by which they caused injury was similar in some agents, and these agents were placed in the same groups, which constituted the Etiologic Classification of Hand Injuries (ECOHI) classification. These groups of mechanisms were: cutting-penetrating, cutting-crushing, crushing-penetrating, crushing-compressing, crushing-burning, stinging, avulsing, electrical current, and chemical injuries and miscellaneous burns. The two most common mechanisms were crushing-compressing and cutting-crushing types, constituting 744 (34.0%) and 514 (23.5%) of injuries, respectively. CONCLUSION: We believe that ECOHI is important to form a common language for the classification of etiologic factors.