[1]戴禹润 郑移兵 齐越峰 李晔 倪前伟 董延旭 金立昆 张杰 张海群 侯云杰.硬纸夹板外固定系统治疗旋后外旋型踝关节骨折的疗效评价[J].中国中医骨伤科杂志,2025,33(02):34-38+44.[doi:10.20085/j.cnki.issn1005-0205.250207]
　DAI Yurun,ZHENG Yibing,QI Yuefeng,et al.Evaluation of the Efficacy of the Cardboard Splint External Fixation System in Treating Ankle Fractures of Supination-External Rotation[J].Chinese Journal of Traditional Medical Traumatology & Orthopedics,2025,33(02):34-38+44.[doi:10.20085/j.cnki.issn1005-0205.250207]
点击复制

硬纸夹板外固定系统治疗旋后外旋型踝关节骨折的疗效评价()
分享到：

《中国中医骨伤科杂志》[ISSN:1005-0205/CN:42-1340/R]

卷:
第33卷
期数:
2025年02期
页码:
34-38+44
栏目:
临床研究
出版日期:
2025-02-15

文章信息/Info

Title:
Evaluation of the Efficacy of the Cardboard Splint External Fixation System in Treating Ankle Fractures of Supination-External Rotation
文章编号:
1005-0205(2025)02-0034-05
作者:
戴禹润 郑移兵 齐越峰 李晔 倪前伟 董延旭 金立昆 张杰 张海群 侯云杰
1北京市丰盛中医骨伤专科医院(北京,100039)
Author(s):
DAI Yurun1; ZHENG Yibing1△; QI Yuefeng1; LI Ye1; NI Qianwei1; DONG Yanxu1; JIN Likun1; ZHANG Jie1; ZHANG Haiqun1; HOU Yunjie1
1Beijing Fengsheng Traditional Chinese Medicine Orthopedic Hospital,Beijing 100033,China.
关键词:
踝关节骨折;  旋后外旋型;  保守治疗;  硬纸夹板;  石膏
Keywords:
ankle fractures;  supination-external rotation;  conservative treatment;  cardboard splint;  plasters
分类号:
R683.42
DOI:
10.20085/j.cnki.issn1005-0205.250207
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的:评价硬纸夹板外固定系统对于Ⅱ度及以上旋后外旋型踝关节骨折固定的有效性与安全性。方法:选取2021年11月至2023年6月就诊的62例旋后外旋型踝关节骨折患者,随机分为观察组和对照组,分别采用硬纸夹板(观察组)和U形高分子石膏(对照组)固定。对比两组患者首次复位后及达到临床愈合时骨折移位的变化情况,比较两组患者骨折临床愈合时间及疼痛评分,将压疮的发生情况作为安全性指标。结果:62例旋后外旋型踝关节骨折患者,首次复位均达到“优”“良”的复位效果,复位前后对比差异有统计学意义(P<0.05); 最终观察组与对照组所有病例均维持了“优”“良”的复位效果,组间对比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。观察组达到临床愈合时间平均为(43.8±12.5)d,对照组为(51.3±13.1)d,两组数据组间对比差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。骨折复位前及固定1周后两组患者VAS评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05); 固定2周后观察组疼痛评分更低,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组患者在外固定保守治疗过程中均未出现压疮。结论:两种外固定方式对旋后外旋型踝关节骨折的治疗均安全有效,硬纸夹板在疼痛控制方面具有一定的优势。相较U形石膏外固定,硬纸夹板外固定可能更有利于踝关节骨折愈合。
Abstract:
Objective:To evaluate the efficacy of the cardboard splint external fixation system for the fixation of ankle fractures of supination-external rotation type Ⅱ～Ⅳ.Methods:62 patients with SER Ⅱ ankle fractures who attended from November 2021 to June 2023 were selected.They were randomly divided into the observation group and the control group and were fixed with cardboard splint and U-shaped polymeric plaster,respectively.We compared the fracture displacement after the initial reduction and that after clinical healing.The time of clinical healing and pain score between the two groups were compared.The occurrence of pressure ulcers was taken as a safety indicator.Results:All 62 patients with SER Ⅱ ankle fractures achieved excellent and good results at initial reduction,and the comparison between before and after reduction was statistically significant(P<0.05).Finally,all the cases in the observation group and the control group maintained the excellent and good reduction,and there was no statistical significance in the comparison between the groups(P>0.05).The average time to clinical healing was(43.8±12.5)d in the observation group and(51.3±13.1)d in the control group.The comparison of statistics between the two groups was of statistical significance(P<0.05).There was no statistical significance in the VAS scores of the two groups of patients before fracture reduction and at 1 week of immobilization(P>0.05).The pain scores were lower in the observation group at 2 weeks of immobilization,and the difference was statistically significant,with the pain in the observation group being lower than that in the control group(P<0.05).There were no pressure sores in the two groups during the conservative treatment of external fixation.Conclusion:Both external fixation methods are safe and effective in the treatment of supinated externally rotated ankle fractures,and the cardboard splint fixation has certain advantages in terms of pain control.External fixation with cardboard splint may be more conducive to fracture healing than the U-shaped plaster external fixation.

参考文献/References:

[1] SCHEER R C,NEWMAN J M,ZHOU J J,et al.Ankle fracture epidemiology in the United States:patient-related trends and mechanisms of injury[J].The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery,2020,59(3):479-483.
[2] 齐越峰,陈福林,鲍树仁,等.四步正踝法治疗Ⅱ度以上旋后外旋型踝关节骨折的病例对照研究[J].中国骨伤,2012,25(8):634-638.
[3] 郑移兵,齐越峰,鮑树仁,等.“丰盛骨伤”骨折治疗经验探析[J].中国中医骨伤科杂志,2020,28(10):78-79.
[4] 齐越峰.丰盛正骨[M].北京:中国中医药出版社,2023:23-25.
[5] 马智佳,韩松,王青华,等.正骨手法保守治疗旋后外旋型Ⅲ度和Ⅳ度踝关节骨折的临床研究[J].中国骨伤,2023,36(8):737-743.
[6] 张溪宁,陈刚,陈诚,等.新型复合材料在骨伤科的应用[J].玻璃纤维,2015(1):8-11.
[7] 赵玉沛,陈孝平.外科学[M].3版.北京:人民卫生出版社,2015:834.
[8] HOEKSTRA H,VINCKIER O,STAES F,et al.In vivo foot segmental motion and coupling analysis during midterm follow-up after the open reduction internal fixation of trimalleolar fractures[J].J Clin Med,2023,12(8):2772.
[9] MIRANDO M,CONTI C,ZENI F,et al.Gait alterations in adults after ankle fracture:a systematic review[J].Diagnostics(Basel),2022,12(1):199.
[10] 白求恩公益基金会创伤骨科专业委员会,中国医疗保健国际交流促进会加速康复外科学分会创伤骨科学组.ERAS理念下踝关节骨折诊疗方案优化的专家共识[J].中华骨与关节外科杂志,2019,12(1):3-12.
[11] 倪纲,黄伟杰,滕跃,等.保守疗法与手术疗法治疗旋后外旋型踝关节骨折临床疗效比较[J].临床和实验医学杂志,2018,17(1):83-86.
[12] 董婷,沈佳炎,李振.杉树皮夹板固定治疗旋后外旋型Ⅲ、Ⅳ度踝关节骨折临床观察[J].浙江中西医结合杂志,2020,30(1):58-60.
[13] 叶健平,李厚霖,陈佳鹏.石膏外固定与切开复位内固定治疗踝关节骨折的临床效果比较[J].临床医学工程,2020,27(7):897-898.
[14] 杜沙沙.手术治疗与保守治疗B1型踝关节骨折的临床效果比较[J].中国继续医学教育,2020,12(28):98-101.
[15] 严文琪,王凯.手法整复与手术治疗老年人踝关节旋后外旋Ⅳ型骨折[J].中华关节外科杂志(电子版),2018,12(6):773-776.
[16] 俞鹏飞,裴帅,沈晓峰,等.龚氏四步复位法术前复位对旋后外旋型Ⅳ度踝关节骨折围手术期疗效的影响[J].中国中医骨伤科杂志,2021,29(11):71-75.
[17] 董延旭,李晔,佟云,等.“丰盛正骨”结合夹板外固定治疗桡骨远端骨折移位的影响因素及高风险时间[J].北京中医药,2023,42(6):626-629.
[18] 谢克波,郝博川.手法闭合复位纸夹板外固定治疗Monteggia骨折[J].中国骨伤,2021,34(9):870-875.
[19] ZHAO J Y,CHEN L M,LI T X,et al.Manual reduction and plaster external fixation for the treatment of closed total talus dislocation:case report and literature review[J].Orthopaedic Surgery,2023,15(4):1179-1186.
[20] ATHAR S M,ASHWOOD N,AEREALIS G,et al.Is external fixation a better way than plaster to supplement K-wires in non-comminuted distal radius fractures?[J].Postgraduate Medical Journal,2018,94(1107):20-24.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
基金项目:北京市西城区科技新星项目(XWKX2022-05)
△通信作者 E-mail:zybsw2010@163.com
更新日期/Last Update: 2025-02-15