Figure-of-eight bandage versus arm sling for treating middle-third clavicle fractures in adults: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Mario Lenza, Luiz Fabiano Presente Taniguchi, Mario Ferretti, Mario Lenza, Luiz Fabiano Presente Taniguchi, Mario Ferretti

Abstract

Background: Fracture of the clavicle is common, accounting for 2.6 to 4.0 % of all fractures, with an overall incidence of 36.5 to 64 per 100,000 per year. Around 80 % of clavicle fractures occur in the middle third of the clavicle. Randomised controlled trials comparing treatment interventions have failed to indicate the best therapeutic practices for these fractures. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effects (benefits and harms) of two commonly-used conservative interventions: the figure-of-eight bandage versus the arm sling as treatments of middle-third clavicle fractures.

Methods/design: This project has been designed as a single-centre, two-arm randomised controlled trial that will compare two interventions: figure-of-eight bandage versus the arm sling. We propose to recruit 110 adults, aged 18 years or older, with an acute (less than 10 days since injury) middle-third clavicle fracture. The primary outcomes to be evaluated will be function and/or disability measured by the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. In order to assess the secondary outcomes, the Modified University of California at Los Angeles (modified - UCLA) Shoulder Rating Scale will be used. The occurrence of pain (Visual Analogue Scale for pain (VAS)), treatment failure, adverse events and the ability to return to previous activities will also be recorded and evaluated as secondary outcomes.

Data analysis: the primary outcome DASH score and the secondary outcomes - modified UCLA and VAS scores - will be analysed graphically. We will apply generalised mixed models with the intervention groups (two levels), and time-point assessments (seven levels) as fixed effects and patients as a random effect.

Discussion: According to the current literature there is very limited evidence from two small trials regarding the effectiveness of different methods of conservative interventions for treating clavicle fractures. This is the first randomised controlled trial comparing the figure-of-eight bandage versus the arm sling for treating clavicle fractures that follows the CONSORT Statement guidelines.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02398006 .

Keywords: Bone; Clavicle; Conservative treatment; Fracture healing; Fractures; Pseudarthrosis; Treatment outcome.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Conservative management to clavicle fractures: a Figure-of-eight bandage. b Simple arm sling
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Flow of participants. Diagram shows the planned flow of participants through each stage of the study

References

    1. Court-Brown CM, Caesar B. Epidemiology of adult fractures: a review. Injury. 2006;37(8):691–7. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2006.04.130.
    1. Nordqvist A, Petersson C. The incidence of fractures of the clavicle. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;300:127–32.
    1. Postacchini F, Gumina S, De Santis P, Albo F. Epidemiology of clavicle fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(5):452–6. doi: 10.1067/mse.2002.126613.
    1. Neer C. Fractures of the clavicle. In: Rockwood CA Jr, Green DP, editors. Fractures in adults. 2. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1984. pp. 707–13.
    1. Nordqvist A, Petersson CJ, Redlund-Johnell I. Mid-clavicle fractures in adults: end result study after conservative treatment. J Orthop Trauma. 1998;12(8):572–6. doi: 10.1097/00005131-199811000-00008.
    1. Robinson CM, Court-Brown CM, McQueen MM, Wakefield AE. Estimating the risk of nonunion following nonoperative treatment of a clavicular fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86(7):1359–65.
    1. Andersen K, Jensen PO, Lauritzen J. Treatment of clavicular fractures. Figure-of-eight bandage versus a simple sling. Acta Orthop Scand. 1987;58(1):71–4. doi: 10.3109/17453678709146346.
    1. Eiff MP. Management of clavicle fractures. Am Fam Physician. 1997;55(1):121–8.
    1. Kotelnicki JJ, Bote HO, Mitts KG. The management of clavicle fractures. JAAPA. 2006;19(9):50.
    1. Bradbury N, Hutchinson J, Hahn D, Colton CL. Clavicular nonunion. 31/32 healed after plate fixation and bone grafting. Acta Orthop Scand. 1996;67(4):367–70. doi: 10.3109/17453679609002333.
    1. Ebraheim NA, Mekhail AO, Darwich M. Open reduction and internal fixation with bone grafting of clavicular nonunion. J Trauma. 1997;42(4):701–4. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199704000-00020.
    1. Jupiter JB, Leffert RD. Non-union of the clavicle. Associated complications and surgical management. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987;69(5):753–60.
    1. Mullaji AB, Jupiter JB. Low-contact dynamic compression plating of the clavicle. Injury. 1994;25(1):41–5. doi: 10.1016/0020-1383(94)90183-X.
    1. Jeray KJ, Cole PA. Clavicle and scapula fracture problems: functional assessment and current treatment strategies. Instr Course Lect. 2011;60:51–71.
    1. Zlowodzki M, Zelle BA, Cole PA, Jeray K, McKee MD. Treatment of acute midshaft clavicle fractures: systematic review of 2144 fractures: on behalf of the Evidence-Based Orthopaedic Trauma Working Group. J Orthop Trauma. 2005;19(7):504–7. doi: 10.1097/01.bot.0000172287.44278.ef.
    1. Lenza M, Belloti JC, Andriolo RB, Faloppa F. Conservative interventions for treating middle third clavicle fractures in adolescents and adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;5:CD007121.
    1. Lenza M, Belloti JC, Gomes Dos Santos JB, Matsumoto MH, Faloppa F. Surgical interventions for treating acute fractures or non-union of the middle third of the clavicle. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;4:CD007428.
    1. Lenza M, Buchbinder R, Johnston RV, Belloti JC, Faloppa F. Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating fractures of the middle third of the clavicle. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;6:CD009363.
    1. Hoofwijk AG, van der Werken C. Conservative treatment of clavicular fractures. Z Unfallchir Versicherungsmed Berufskr. 1988;81(3):151–6.
    1. Heuer HJ, Boykin RE, Petit CJ, Hardt J, Millett PJ. Decision-making in the treatment of diaphyseal clavicle fractures: is there agreement among surgeons? Results of a survey on surgeons’ treatment preferences. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23(2):e23–33. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2013.04.016.
    1. Pieske O, Dang M, Zaspel J, Beyer B, Löffler T, Piltz S. Midshaft clavicle fractures – classification and therapy. Results of a survey at German trauma departments. Unfallchirurg. 2008;111(6):387–94. doi: 10.1007/s00113-008-1430-z.
    1. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, Egger M, Davidoff F, Elbourne D, et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134(8):663–94. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-134-8-200104170-00012.
    1. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, et al. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Int J Surg. 2012;10(1):28–55. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.10.001.
    1. Bhandari M, Guyatt GH, Swiontkowski MF. User’s guide to the orthopaedic literature: how to use an article about a surgical therapy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83-A(6):916–26.
    1. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT Group CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340:c332. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c332.
    1. Kibler WB, Sciascia A, Wilkes T. Scapular dyskinesis and its relation to shoulder injury. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2012;20(6):364–72. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-20-06-364.
    1. Robinson CM. Fractures of the clavicle in the adult. Epidemiology and classification. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 1998;80(3):476–84. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.80B3.8079.
    1. Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG) Am J Ind Med. 1996;29(6):602–8. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199606)29:6<602::AID-AJIM4>;2-L.
    1. Orfale AG, Araújo PM, Ferraz MB, Natour J. Translation into Brazilian Portuguese, cultural adaptation and evaluation of the reliability of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2005;38(2):293–302. doi: 10.1590/S0100-879X2005000200018.
    1. Amstutz HC, Sew Hoy AL, Clarke IC. UCLA anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1981;155:7–20.
    1. Ellman H, Hanker G, Bayer M. Repair of the rotator cuff. End-result study of factors influencing reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1986;68(8):1136–44.
    1. Oku EC, Andrade AP, Stadiniky SP, Carrera EF, Tellini GG. Translation and cultural adaptation of the Modified-University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Rating Scale to Portuguese language. Rev Bras Reumatol. 2006;46(4):246–52. doi: 10.1590/S0482-50042006000400003.
    1. Flandry F, Hunt JP, Terry GC, Hughstons JC. Analysis of subjective knee complaints using visual analog scales. Am L Sport Med. 1991;19:112–8. doi: 10.1177/036354659101900204.
    1. Huskisson EC. Measurement of pain. J Rheumatol. 1982;9(5):768–9.
    1. Eccleston C, Moore RA, Derry S, Bell RF, McQuay H. Improving the quality and reporting of systematic reviews. Eur J Pain. 2010;14(7):667–9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2010.05.015.
    1. Moore RA, Eccleston C, Derry S, Wiffen P, Bell RF, Straube S, et al. ‘Evidence’ in chronic pain – establishing best practice in the reporting of systematic reviews. Pain. 2010;150(3):386–9. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.05.011.
    1. LaVelle DG. Delayed union and nonunion of fractures. In: Canale ST, editor. Campbell’s operative orthopaedics. 10. Philadelphia: Mosby; 2003. pp. 3125–65.
    1. Jeray KJ. Acute midshaft clavicular fracture. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2007;15(4):239–48. doi: 10.5435/00124635-200704000-00007.
    1. Manske DJ, Szabo RM. The operative treatment of mid-shaft clavicular non-unions. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1985;67(9):1367–71.
    1. Wilkins RM, Johnston RM. Ununited fractures of the clavicle. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1983;65(6):773–8.
    1. Zanca P. Shoulder pain: involvement of the acromioclavicular joint. (Analysis of 1000 cases) Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med. 1971;112(3):493–506. doi: 10.2214/ajr.112.3.493.
    1. Gummesson C, Atroshi I, Ekdahl C. The disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) outcome questionnaire: longitudinal construct validity and measuring self-rated health change after surgery. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2003;4:11. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-4-11.
    1. Schulz KF, Grimes DA. Blinding in randomised trials: hiding who got what. Lancet. 2002;359:696–700. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07816-9.
    1. Robinson CM, Goudie EB, Murray IR, Jenkins PJ, Ahktar MA, Read EO, et al. Open reduction and plate fixation versus nonoperative treatment for displaced midshaft clavicular fractures: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(17):1576–84. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.00307.
    1. Ersen A, Atalar AC, Birisik F, Saglam Y, Demirhan M. Comparison of simple arm sling and figure of eight clavicular bandage for midshaft clavicular fractures: a randomised controlled study. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-B(11):1562–5. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.97B11.35588.
    1. Hill JM, McGuire MH, Crosby LA. Closed treatment of displaced middle-third fractures of the clavicle gives poor results. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 1997;79:537–9. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.79B4.7529.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit