| Literature DB >> 24612503 |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Replantation in the upper extremity is a well-established microsurgical procedure. Many have reported patients' satisfaction and functional measurements.The aim was to investigate the long time consequences as activity limitations in hand/arm, the general health and cold sensitivity after a replantation or revascularization in the upper extremity and to examine if sense of coherence (SOC) can be an indicator for rehabilitation focus.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24612503 PMCID: PMC3995792 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-73
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Total number of patients divided into groups with different levels of replantation/revascularization
| Age (years) | 39 (1–81) | 46 (8–81) | 34 (1–76) | 30,5 (9–63) | 30 (18–66) | 49 (8–68) |
| Gender F/M | 17%/83% | 16%/84% | 17%/83% | 14%/86% | 22%/78% | 15%/85% |
| Cause of injury(%) | | | | | | |
| Saw | | | ||||
| Wood cutter | ||||||
| Machine | | |||||
| Farmer | | | | | ||
| Crush | | | | | | |
| HISS | 120 (24–409) | 144 (78–406) | 84 (24–409) | 174 (56–337) | 200 (107–323) | 190 (100–250) |
| EQ-5D VAS | 80 (5–100) | 80 (30–100) | 80 (12–100) | 80 (15–90) | 70 (5–78) | 80 (10–100) |
| EQ-5D | 0.824 | 0.824 | 0.824 | 0.824 | 0.708 | 0.824 |
| index | (-0.624 -1.0) | (-0.324 –1.0) | (-0.624 –1.0) | (0.075 – 1.0) | (0.034–0.713) | (0.374 – 1.0) |
| QuickDASH | 11.4 (0–88.6) | 9.1 (0–72.7) | 9.1 (0–88.6) | 13.6 (2.3-47.7) | 43.2 (27.3-88.6) | 29.5 (0–59.1) |
| CISS | 36 (10–89) | 35 (4–75) | 35 (0–89) | 37 (14–82) | 44 (18–52) | 41 (4–56) |
| SOC | 75 (27-93 | 76 (50–90) | 73 (27–93) | 79 (40–91) | 72 (68–84) | 80 (28–91) |
| ADL | 13 (10–25) | 13 (10–21) | 13 (10–24) | 14 (10–22) | 21 (14–25) | 18 (14–21) |
| JAMAR% of contalateral | 66 (0–100) | 84 (24–100) | 64 (2–100) | 56 (7–100) | 28 (0–51) | 25,5 (0–75) |
| PINCH% of contralateral | 75 (0–100) | 56 (12–100) | 80 (6–100) | 62 (9–100) | 31 (12–62) | 40,5 (0–80) |
Median and min – max values.
Bold indicate significant difference.
Figure 1Level of amputation in the upper extremity and the level of amputation in the hand expressed in per cent.
Differences between patients with different hand injury severity according to HISS severity groups
| | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 35 | 34▲ | 41 | 0,002 | |
| EQ-5D VAS | 84 | 79 | 74 | 0,09 |
| 0,874† | 0,809 | 0,760 | 0,02 | |
| 8,9† | 15,5▲ | 21,5 | 0,004 | |
| 31† | 32▲ | 41 | 0,002 | |
| 79†ϒ | 70 | 71 | 0,04 | |
| 12,5† | 12,6▲ | 14,6 | <0,0001 | |
| 79† | 68▲ | 57 | 0,0007 | |
| 79† | 76▲ | 61 | 0,001 |
*Moderate (n = 24), Severe (n = 54) and Major (n = 116).
†Significant different from Major.
ϒSignificant different from Severe.
▲Significant different from Major.
Differences between patients with an abnormal cold intolerance (CISS > 50) and those with CISS ≤50
| Age | 38 | 43 | 0.07 |
| HISS | 134 | 160 | 0.06 |
| 80 | 66 | <0.0001 | |
| 0.831 | 0.690 | <0.0001 | |
| 13 | 33 | <0.0001 | |
| 14 | 15 | 0.03 | |
| 74 | 64 | <0.0001 | |
| 67 | 52 | 0.01 | |
| 74 | 47 | <0.0001 |
*CISS ≤ 50 (n = 102) and CISS >50 (n = 34).
Differences between patients who went back to work and those who had to retire early due to the injury
| 37 | 52 | <0,0001 | |
| 133 | 194 | 0,002 | |
| 79 | 62 | 0,01 | |
| 0,821 | 0,629 | 0,008 | |
| 13,9 | 45,2 | <0,0001 | |
| 35 | 57 | <0,0001 | |
| 14 | 16 | 0,003 | |
| SOC | 72 | 67 | 0,08 |
| 67 | 31 | <0,0001 | |
| 69 | 46 | 0.01 |
*Back to work (n = 115) and Early retirement (n = 15).
Differences between patients with high (≥75) or low (<75) SOC
| 42 | 36 | 0.004 | |
| HISS | 139 | 140 | 0.9 |
| 84 | 68 | <0.0001 | |
| 0.865 | 0.712 | <0.0001 | |
| 12.7 | 24.1 | <0.0001 | |
| 31 | 43 | <0.0001 | |
| 13.4 | 14.7 | 0.01 | |
| 64 | 62 | 0.6 | |
| 68 | 66 | 0.5 |
*High SOC (n = 58) and Low SOC (n = 75).