| Literature DB >> 29719747 |
Önder Kalenderer1, Ali Turgut1, Emre Bilgin1, Serkan Erkus1, Fikri B İpci1, Tunc P Edizsoy2.
Abstract
Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of resident level of training on fluoroscopy duration in pediatric supracondylar humeral fractures treated with closed reduction and percutaneous pinning (CRPP). Methods After classifying the surgeons according to their seniorities, the duration of fluoroscopy time of 80 patients with extension type III supracondylar fractures during reduction and pinning was recorded. Results The time duration of reduction procedures was similar in all groups with respect to the surgical experience; however, time durations of percutaneous pinning procedures were found statistically different between groups (p=0.042). Conclusion Surgical experience is very important in the management of supracondylar humeral fractures in children, especially in percutaneous pinning rather than closed reduction.Entities:
Keywords: closed reduction; fluoroscopy; percutaneous pinning; supracondylar fracture; surgical experience
Year: 2018 PMID: 29719747 PMCID: PMC5922507 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.2245
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cureus ISSN: 2168-8184
Number of residents in each group and their seniorities in orthopedics
| Number of Residents | Training time in Orthopedics | |
| Group I | 2 | 54 months |
| Group II | 2 | 48 months |
| Group III | 2 | 42 months |
| Group IV | 2 | 36 months |
Duration of closed reduction and percutaneous pinning in four groups (seconds)
*Kruskal Wallis Test
| Groups | Group I (n=18) Mean±SD(min-max) | Group II (n=18) Mean±SD(min-max) | Group III (n=12) Mean±SD(min-max) | Group IV (n=32) Mean±SD(min-max) | Statistical Significance* |
| Closed Reduction | 3.50±4.11(1–16) | 3.39±4.55(1–20) | 3.75±3.86(1–12) | 6.63±8.71(1-29) | p> 0.05 |
| Percutaneous Pinning | 5.61±2.97(1–14) | 6.39±3.45(3–14) | 7.75 ±4.20(2–14) | 9.91±5.75(1-24) | p = 0.042 |
The statistical significance of the two-group comparisons for the duration of percutaneous pinning
Mann Whitney U Test
| Group I | Group II | Group III | Group IV | |
| Group I | p> 0.05 | p> 0.05 | p =0.012 | |
| Group II | p> 0.05 | p> 0.05 | p =0.047 | |
| Group III | p> 0.05 | p> 0.05 | p> 0.05 | |
| Group IV | p =0.012 | p =0.047 | p> 0.05 |