• Ersin Taşkın, Mahmut Kursat Ozsahin, Muhammed Yusuf Afacan, Melda Acar, Eyyup Kara, and Ali Şeker.
• Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Istanbul University Cerrahpasa-Cerrahpasa Faculty of Medicine, İstanbul-Türkiye.
• Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2023 Oct 1; 29 (10): 117511831175-1183.

BackgroundProximal femoral nailing (PFN) and hip arthroplasty (HA) are the two most often utilized surgical procedures for treating hip fractures in older patients. The post-operative postural balance and functional outcomes of patients may be significantly influenced by the technical distinctions between PFN and HA. This will influence the surgeon's preferred course of therapy. To examine the functional outcomes of patients treated with PFN and HA following a hip fracture, this study used computerized dynamic posturography (CDP). The aim of that study was to evaluate how the two treatment modalities affected patients' post-operative balance, postural stability, and functional rehabilitation.MethodsA total of 26 patients who underwent proximal femoral surgery (15 patients PFN [58%] and 11 patients HA [42%]) due to hip fractures were evaluated at least 12 months postoperatively. They were tested by direct radiographs, hip joint examinations, Harris hip score (HHS), and CDP.ResultsTwelve (46%) of 26 patients were male and 14 (54%) were female. The mean age of the participants in the study was 67.9±14.2 years. The mean follow-up period was 24 (12-44) months. The average Harris score of PFN group was 79.3 (46.8-100) points and HA group was 83.7 (61.9-99.9) points. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of Harris Score (P=0.54). The average of the mixed value of the balance results obtained with CDP (the Composite score) for PFN group was 70.5 (56-79) points, and for HA group was 71.9 (56-83) points. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the Composite Score (P=0.47). Accordingly, 12 (80%) of the patients who underwent PFN had good results and 3 (20%) of them had bad results. Eight (72.7%) of those who underwent HA had good results and 3 (27.3%) had bad results. There was no statistically significant difference (P=0.66).ConclusionComparing the composite score for balance results and HHS results for rehabilitation with the data of the patients who underwent PFN and HA, there was no statistically significant difference between these two techniques in terms of postural stabil-ity and balance as a result of CDP examination.

16 keywords...

hide…