| Literature DB >> 30251154 |
Diederik Pieter Johan Smeeing1,2, Roderick Marijn Houwert3,4, Jan Paul Briet5, Rolf Hendrik Herman Groenwold6, Koen Willem Wouter Lansink7, Luke Petrus Hendrikus Leenen4, Peer van der Zwaal8, Jochem Maarten Hoogendoorn9, Mark van Heijl5, Egbert Jan Verleisdonk5, Michiel Joseph Marie Segers10, Falco Hietbrink4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to assess if unprotected weight-bearing as tolerated is superior to protected weight-bearing and unprotected non-weight-bearing in terms of functional outcome and complications after surgical fixation of Lauge-Hansen supination external rotation stage 2-4 ankle fractures.Entities:
Keywords: Ankle fracture; Mobilization; Postoperative care; Randomized controlled trial; Weight-bearing
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30251154 PMCID: PMC7026225 DOI: 10.1007/s00068-018-1016-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg ISSN: 1863-9933 Impact factor: 3.693
Fig. 1Flowchart of patient selection in the WOW! Study. Flowchart indicating patient selection. Three patients crossed over due to cast irritation. SE Supination external rotation
Baseline characteristics of included patients with ankle fracture
| Unprotected non-weight-bearing ( | Protected weight-bearing ( | Unprotected weight-bearing ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age in years (± SD) | 37.8 (± 13.7) | 41.5 (± 14.2) | 37.8 (± 15.1) |
| Age range in years | 18–65 | 18–62 | 18–65 |
| Number of males (%) | 23 (62.2%) | 16 (44.4%) | 22 (52.4%) |
| Symptomatic side right | 21 (56.8%) | 23 (63.9%) | 18 (42.9%) |
| Smoking | 7 (28.0%) (12 missing) | 5 (22.7%) (14 missing) | 9 (36.0%) (17 missing) |
| Cause of fracture | |||
| Fall < 3 m | 0 (%) | 2 (5.6%) | 4 (9.5%) |
| Fall from scooter | 0 (%) | 0 | 2 (4.8%) |
| Fall from bicycle | 8 (21.6%) | 8 (22.2%) | 8 (19.0%) |
| Sport | 9 (24.3%) | 3 (8.3%) | 13 (31.0%) |
| Winter sports | 1 (2.7%) | 2 (5.6%) | 1 (2.4%) |
| Simple inversion | 17 (45.9%) | 20 (55.6%) | 12 (28.6%) |
| Other | 2 (5.4%) | 1 (2.8%) | 2 (4.8%) |
| Lauge-Hansen classification | |||
| Supination external rotation type 2 | 14 (37.8%) | 9 (25.0%) | 14 (33.3%) |
| Supination external rotation type 3 | 2 (5.4%) | 4 (11.1%) | 0 |
| Supination external rotation type 4 | 21 (56.8%) | 23 (63.9%) | 28 (66.7%) |
| Type of fixation lateral malleolus | |||
| 2× screw fixation | 3 (8.1%) | 4 (11.1%) | 7 (16.7%) |
| Screw fixation and neutralization plate | 19 (51.4%) | 22 (61.1%) | 23 (54.8%) |
| Neutralization plate | 7 (18.9%) | 7 (19.4%) | 6 (14.3%) |
| Dorsolateral buttress plate | 8 (21.6%) | 3 (8.3%) | 6 (14.3%) |
| Type of fixation medial malleolus | |||
| 1× screw fixation | 1 (2.7%) | 2 (5.6%) | 1 (2.4%) |
| 1× screw fixation and Kirschner wire | 2 (5.4%) | 0 | 4 (9.5%) |
| 2× screw fixation | 2 (5.4%) | 1 (2.8%) | 1 (2.4%) |
| Zuggertung | 2 (5.4%) | 1 (2.8%) | 6 (14.3%) |
| Other | 0 | 1 (2.8%) | 0 |
| Not applicable/no fractured medial malleolus/no fixation required | 30 (81.1%) | 31 (86.1%) | 30 (71.4%) |
No statistically significant differences were found in baseline characteristics between the three treatment groups after randomization
SD Standard deviation
Results and differences in Olerud Molander Ankle Score, time to return to work and sports
| Unprotected non-weight-bearing ( | Protected weight-bearing ( | Unprotected weight-bearing ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Olerud Molander score 6 weeks | 45.8 (± 22.4) | 51.8 (± 20.4) | 61.2 (± 19.0) | 0.011* |
| Olerud Molander score 12 weeks | 67.9 (± 19.8) | 68.6 (± 14.6) | 72.2 (± 19.4) | 0.566* |
| Olerud Molander score 6 months | 80.9 (± 18.0) | 86.0 (± 13.9) | 85.5 (± 19.2) | 0.496* |
| Olerud Molander score 1 year | 88.7 (± 11.4) | 89.1 (± 15.0) | 86.8 (± 16.0) | 0.773* |
| Time to return to work in weeks˟ | 7.0 (± 5.3) ( | 5.7 (± 4.9) ( | 4.1 (± 3.3) ( | 0.028* |
| Time to return to sports in weeks˟ | 14.1 (± 5.7) ( | 12.7 (± 8.4) ( | 8.9 (± 4.7) ( | 0.005* |
| Complications | Total: 5 (13.5%) − 3× low grade infection° − 1× dystrophy − 1× deep venous thrombosis | Total: 1 (2.7%) − 1× low grade infection° | Total: 3 (7.1%) − 3× low grade infection° | 0.228† |
This table shows the functional outcome using the Olerud Molander Ankle Score, the time to return to work and sports, and the number of complications based on the postoperative treatment of ankle fractures. The Olerud Molander Ankle Score ranges from 0 to 100. A higher score indicates a better functional outcome. Improved function was seen at 6 weeks in the mobilization as tolerated study arm. On all other time points no significant differences were seen. In addition, patients in the unprotected weight-bearing group demonstrated a reduced time to return to work and sports
Mean scores (± standard deviation) are shown
*ANOVA
˟Analysis was performed on the number of patients that reported they had work, respectively, performed sports
°A low-grade infection was defined as a clinical suspicion of a wound infection based on redness and pus and/or fever in combination with the necessity of antibiotic treatment
†Chi square
Fig. 2Functional outcome using the Olerud Molander Ankle Score based on the postoperative treatment of ankle fractures. This figure shows the functional outcome using the Olerud Molander Ankle Score based on the postoperative treatment of ankle fractures. The Olerud Molander Ankle Score ranges from 0 to 100. A higher score indicates a better functional outcome. Mean Olerud Molander Ankle Scores are shown with corresponding 95% confidence intervals of the means on the different time points
Results and differences in quality of life using the SF-36
| Unprotected non-weight-bearing ( | Protected weight-bearing ( | Unprotected weight-bearing ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SF-36 score at 12 weeks | ||||
| Physical functioning | 74.9 (± 22.8) | 75.5 (± 18.3) | 76.8 (± 21.9) | 0.922 |
| Role-physical functioning | 41.7 (± 41.8) | 31.9 (± 37.7) | 40.8 (± 40.4) | 0.575 |
| Bodily pain | 76.9 (± 18.7) | 76.1 (± 15.0) | 73.2 (± 22.2) | 0.696 |
| General health perception | 80.9 (± 17.8) | 78.1 (± 18.5) | 77.6 (± 13.2) | 0.676 |
| Energy/fatigue (vitality) | 73.9 (± 20.5) | 72.2 (± 14.1) | 69.9 (± 18.0) | 0.629 |
| Social functioning | 83.3 (± 18.7) | 80.6 (± 21.0) | 79.0 (± 23.4) | 0.686 |
| Role-emotional functioning | 15.2 (± 31.3) | 11.5 (± 27.1) | 14.9 (± 31.7) | 0.869 |
| Mental health | 83.3 (± 14.1) | 85.5 (± 11.5) | 81.1 (± 15.8) | 0.439 |
| SF-36 score at 1 year | ||||
| Physical functioning | 93.1 (± 10.0) | 90.5 (± 16.3) | 88.8 (± 17.1) | 0.459 |
| Role-physical functioning | 5.7 (± 17.2) | 16.7 (± 33.4) | 19.1 (± 37.0) | 0.150 |
| Bodily pain | 92.1 (± 16.4) | 86.4 (± 20.4) | 84.7 (± 21.7) | 0.249 |
| General health perception | 81.4 (± 13.7) | 80.5 (± 17.3) | 79.2 (± 17.9) | 0.846 |
| Energy/fatigue (vitality) | 72.1 (± 16.1) | 73.8 (± 16.2) | 75.5 (± 17.1) | 0.682 |
| Social functioning | 90.4 (± 18.5) | 93.9 (± 12.1) | 91.5 (± 19.1) | 0.675 |
| Role-emotional functioning | 6.7 (± 22.6) | 12.1 (± 31.0) | 17.5 (± 37.0) | 0.328 |
| Mental health | 80.7 (± 14.2) | 81.9 (± 13.6) | 81.6 (± 16.8) | 0.939 |
This table shows the health-related quality of life using the SF-36v2 based on the postoperative treatment of ankle fractures. A higher score of the SF-36v2 indicates less disability (range from 0 to 100). No significant differences were seen
Mean scores (± standard deviations) are shown
*ANOVA