• Injury · May 2020

    Review

    Radiographic evaluations: Which are most effective to follow fracture healing?

    • Yousif Atwan and Emil H Schemitsch.
    • Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Western University, London, ON N6A 5A5, Canada. Electronic address: yatwan@uwo.ca.
    • Injury. 2020 May 1; 51 Suppl 2: S18-S22.

    AbstractThe assessment of fracture healing is an imperative and fundamental clinical aspect within orthopaedics. Despite that, there have historically been non-reliable methods utilized to assess for fracture union and nonunion. In recent years, a number of radiographic assessment tools such as the Radiographic Union Score for Tibial fractures (RUST) and Radiographic Union Score for Hip fracture (RUSH) have been developed in order to improve the reliability of fracture assessment for union. These scores have not only increased the reliability of assessments but have also provided thresholds to aid in predicting nonunion as well as union. The nonunion risk determination (NURD) Score was also created to prognosticate these clinical presentations. With the large burdens of cost, lower quality of life and morbidity associated with fracture nonunion, these evaluation methods have provided orthopaedic surgeons with an improved ability to predict nonunion and assist in the management of patients. This review outlines the development, reliability testing as well as biomechanical validity testing associated with these scoring systems.Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…