3 Clinical Trials for Various Conditions
To prove that use of intramedullary cannulated headless hardware fixation of metacarpal fractures provides anatomic reduction, stable fixation, less operative trauma and early, active post-operative mobilization. The study compares two types of implant to determine efficacy in reduction and maintenance of reduction for fracture healing.
There is a lack of strong evidence guiding the treatment of non-thumb isolated closed metacarpal shaft fractures towards operative fixation versus conservative management. Surgical approach is largely decided by surgeon preference/skill, qualities of fracture, and extent of injury. Previous studies have shown that many metacarpal fractures can be treated non-operatively, with outcomes being as good as or better than those treated with surgery. Surgery using plates can often cause stiffness, contractures, and in rare causes nonunion infection or tendon rupture. This study will seek to build upon previous evidence to help guide future surgeons as they decide how to approach a closed non-thumb metacarpal fractures. Patients will be identified in clinic after x-rays are positive for a non-thumb metacarpal fracture. If they consent to participate in the study, they will be put into either the non-operative or surgical group. This decision will be done through randomization.The investigators anticipate that 100 subjects will be enrolled. Patient reported outcomes, including the PROMIS forms, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) surveys and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) will be recorded. Range of motion will be assessed at all time points along with grip strength. X-rays will be evaluated for metacarpal shortening, rotation or non-union. In addition, time for clinical and radiologic union will be documented.
Many common arm fractures have an excellent prognosis with little more than symptomatic treatment. When studying these fractures, investigators find that a substantial number of patients do not attend follow-up appointments. The difficulty of maneuvering in big cities, the cost of parking, the co-pay for the visit and the wait times for x-ray and doctor are all inconveniences that some patients might prefer to avoid. Building on prior research, it is appropriate to offer patients with common minor upper extremity fractures that have an excellent prognosis optional follow-up after the first visit. The plan would be to be available by phone, email and subsequent appointment at the patient's discretion if they felt that the recovery was off course. Benefit to individual participants is unlikely. The study will benefit the society as a whole, by providing a better understanding of these common fractures. It can also affect the economics of our health system by avoiding further follow-up appointments. Primary null hypothesis: There is no difference in patient outcome 2-6 months after injury between patients that return for a second visit, and patients that do not. Secondary null hypothesis: There is no difference in patient satisfaction 2-6 months after injury between patients that return for a second visit, and patients that do not.