These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A multicentre, prospective, randomised comparison of the sliding hip screw with the Medoff sliding screw and side plate for unstable intertrochanteric hip fractures.
    Author: McCormack R, Panagiotopolous K, Buckley R, Penner M, Perey B, Pate G, Goetz T, Piper M.
    Journal: Injury; 2013 Dec; 44(12):1904-9. PubMed ID: 23876624.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the dynamic hip screw (DHS) and Medoff sliding plate (MSP) for unstable intertrochanteric hip fractures. DESIGN: A randomised, prospective trial design was used. SETTING: The study was undertaken in two level-1 trauma centres and one community hospital. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 163 patients with unstable intertrochanteric hip fractures (Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) 31-A2) were randomised to DHS or MSP. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were designed to focus on isolated unstable intertrochanteric hip fractures in ambulatory patients. INTERVENTION: Randomisation was performed intra-operatively, after placement of a 135° guide wire. Follow-up assessments were performed at regular intervals for a minimum of 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome measure was re-operation rate. The secondary outcome was patient function, evaluated using a validated outcome measure, the Hip Fracture Functional Recovery Score. Tertiary outcomes included: mortality, hospital stay, quality of reduction and malunion rate. RESULTS: A total of 86 patients were randomised to DHS and 77 to MSP. The groups had similar patient demographics, pre-fracture status and in-hospital course. The quality of reduction was the same for each group, but the operative time was longer in the MSP group (61.6 vs. 50.1min, P=0.01). The rate of re-operation was low (3/86 in DHS and 2/77 in MSP) with no statistically significant difference. The functional outcomes were the same for both groups, with functional recovery scores at 6 months of 51.0% in the DHS arm and 49.7% in the MSP arm. CONCLUSIONS: The two techniques produced similar results for the clinically important outcomes of the need for further surgery and functional status of the patients at 6 months' follow-up.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]