A comparison of two military temporary femoral external fixators
| Autor: | Paul J. Dougherty, Kyle Hickerson, Edgar Conley, Brian Vickaryous |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2003 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
External fixator External Fixators medicine.medical_treatment Bone Nails Time External fixation Cadaver Fracture Fixation medicine Humans Orthopedics and Sports Medicine Femur Military Medicine Orthodontics Osteosynthesis business.industry General Medicine Equipment Design Surgery Biomechanical Phenomena Equipment Failure Analysis Level of care business Femoral Fractures |
| Zdroj: | Clinical orthopaedics and related research. (412) |
| ISSN: | 0009-921X |
| Popis: | Temporary external fixation of femur fractures, used at civilian trauma centers for patients who cannot tolerate more extensive procedures, also is planned for use in military field hospitals to provide temporary stabilization and allow for safe transport of a patient to the next level of care. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate three constructs: an external fixator made by one manufacturer and two Hoffman II constructs: uniplanar and biplanar. The study consisted of two parts: a biomechanical study of each of the three constructs and the application of each of the two Hoffmann II constructs to separate cadaver thighs by resident surgeons. Five resident surgeons participated in the study using five pairs of cadaver thighs. The biplanar construct was stiffer in axial and torsional stability when compared with the uniplanar construct. There was no difference in the amount of time needed to apply the constructs nor was either construct found to be subjectively easier to apply by the surgeons. There was an increased number of unicortical pins and plunges (when a pin inadvertently slips over the side) with the uniplanar construct when compared with the biplanar. The biplanar construct is biomechanically more stable and appears to allow for more accurate placement of pins. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|