Comparison of K-wire fixation and ORIF for distal radius fractures
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Comparison of the results of Open reduction and internal fixation with plates and screws with percutaneous K-wire fixation in the treatment of distal radius fractures.
IRAS ID
131602
Contact name
Krishna Moorthy
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Imperial College London
Research summary
A retrospective study of the results of treatment of patients who had fracture of the distal radius ( the wrist side end of the forearm bone), treated with application of percutaneous K-wires (passing a wire through the skin to fix the fracture fragments together), versus those treated with open reduction and internal fixation with plate and screws ( opening the fracture site through surgical dissection and applying matal plates and screws to keep them together.
All patients will be adults who are able to fill out a questionnaire form and fall within the age bracket of 16 to 60 years.
The reason for the study is to identify any justification for the more recent increase in recourse to open reduction and internal fixation of distal radius fractures in a class of distal radius fractures, as opposed to the less expensive and easier treatment, like the use K-wire for stabilisation of this fracture, and to make recommendations.
Patients will be recruited from the Hospital theatre register for the retrospective study.
All identified patients will be contacted by telephone and consent to participate in the study will be obtained in writing through the post.
The patients’ medical records and X-rays will be accessed in the hospital to carry out the study. A validated upper limb Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Score (PROMS) i.e. (Disability of Arm and Shoulder and Hand (DASH))will be sent to the patients to complete.
No New X-rays will be requested and there will be no new clinical examination, requiring Hospital visit.
REC name
North West - Liverpool Central Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
14/NW/0076
Date of REC Opinion
13 Feb 2014
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion