Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAmiri, H
dc.contributor.authorShams Vahdati, S
dc.contributor.authorFekri, S
dc.contributor.authorZadegan, SA
dc.contributor.authorShokoohi, H
dc.contributor.authorRahimi-Movaghar, V
dc.date.accessioned2018-08-26T08:51:57Z
dc.date.available2018-08-26T08:51:57Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.identifier.urihttp://dspace.tbzmed.ac.ir:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/53578
dc.description.abstractBackground We aimed to evaluate the role of a normal elbow active range of motion (ROM) in predicting low fracture risk and avoiding elbow X-ray in patients with acute elbow injuries. Lack of any approved rules for this purpose led us to evaluate simple physical examination methods to predict elbow fractures. Methods In this observational study, all patients with elbow injury who presented to two emergency departments were enrolled according to specific criteria. Patients were examined by emergency or orthopedics residents. Elbow radiographs were reviewed by a radiologist for fractures and soft tissue injuries. Results of the clinical examination and radiographs were recorded for statistical analysis. Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. Results Elbow fractures were identified in 10 of the 102 enrolled patients (9.8%). Nine of the 10 had limited ROM in all movements. Limited active elbow ROM in predicting elbow fracture revealed a sensitivity of 90%, specificity of 92%, and positive and negative predictive values of 56% and 98%, respectively. Individuals with limitation in one or two directions had no signs of fracture in the X-rays. Conclusion Patients with elbow injury and a limited ROM in all directions of flexion, extension, supination and pronation require further X-ray investigations.
dc.language.isoEnglish; Turkish
dc.relation.ispartofUlusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi
dc.subjectadolescent
dc.subjectadult
dc.subjectaged
dc.subjectbody posture
dc.subjectchild
dc.subjectclinical examination
dc.subjectcontrolled study
dc.subjectelbow flexion
dc.subjectelbow fracture
dc.subjectelbow injury
dc.subjectelbow radiography
dc.subjectfemale
dc.subjecthuman
dc.subjectmajor clinical study
dc.subjectmale
dc.subjectobservational study
dc.subjectolecranon fracture
dc.subjectphysical examination
dc.subjectpredictive value
dc.subjectpreschool child
dc.subjectprospective study
dc.subjectrange of motion
dc.subjectreview
dc.subjectrisk
dc.subjectschool child
dc.subjectsensitivity and specificity
dc.subjectsoft tissue injury
dc.subjectX ray
dc.subjectcomplication
dc.subjectelbow
dc.subjectFractures, Bone
dc.subjectHumeral Fractures
dc.subjectinjuries
dc.subjectjoint characteristics and functions
dc.subjectmiddle aged
dc.subjectolecranon
dc.subjectradiography
dc.subjectSoft Tissue Injuries
dc.subjectvery elderly
dc.subjectyoung adult
dc.subjectAdolescent
dc.subjectAdult
dc.subjectAged
dc.subjectAged, 80 and over
dc.subjectChild
dc.subjectChild, Preschool
dc.subjectElbow
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectFractures, Bone
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectHumeral Fractures
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subjectOlecranon Process
dc.subjectProspective Studies
dc.subjectRange of Motion, Articular
dc.subjectSoft Tissue Injuries
dc.subjectYoung Adult
dc.titleDoes preservation of active range of motion after acute elbow injury rule out the need for radiography? [Akut dirsek travmasi{dotless}ndan sonra aktif eklem hareket açi{dotless}kli{dotless}?i{dotless}ni{dotless}n korunmasi{dotless} radyografi gereklili?ini ortadan kaldi{dotless}ri{dotless}r mi{dotless}?]
dc.typeArticle
dc.citation.volume18
dc.citation.issue6
dc.citation.spage479
dc.citation.epage482
dc.citation.indexScopus
dc.identifier.DOIhttps://doi.org/10.5505/tjtes.2012.26790


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record