Abstract
Background:
Fifth metacarpal neck fractures account for 20% of all hand fractures, yet there remains debate with respect to management, particularly when conservative treatment is initiated. The objective of this study is to compare functional and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients treated with early protected movement or splint immobilization.
Methods:
This national multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial compared 2 groups; elastic bandage with early protected movement versus immobilization with splinting. Demographic characteristics were collected at baseline. Functional outcomes (grip strength testing) and PROs (Brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire [bMHQ]) were collected at 4, 8, and 12 weeks post-intervention. Grip strength values of the injured hand were normalized to both the non-injured hand (at baseline), and the Canadian reference values.
Results:
Thirty-seven participants from 5 Canadian centers were randomized into the splint (n = 21) or elastic bandage group (n = 16). There were no significant differences in the bMHQ score between the splint (52.1 ± 27.2) or the elastic bandage (46.6 ± 20.4) groups (P = .51). There were no differences in baseline grip strength between the splint (15.3 ± 8.9 kg) and elastic bandage (19.9 ± 7.5 kg) groups. At 8 weeks, the elastic bandage group had a significantly higher grip strength than the splint group (93% vs 64%, respectively: P < .05), when standardized as a percentage of the Canadian reference values.
Conclusion:
Patients with Boxer’s fractures treated with early protected movement had better functional outcomes by 8 weeks post-treatment as compared to the Canadian reference values of those treated with immobilization and splinting. Providers should manage Boxer’s fractures with early protected movement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
