Home  |  Login  |  Signup
National Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics
  • Printed Journal
  • Indexed Journal
  • Refereed Journal
  • Peer Reviewed Journal

National Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics

2021, Vol. 5 Issue 4, Part A
Faulty external fixation
Author(s): Dr. Ameer Mohammad Muslem, Dr. Mohammed Naser Hussein and Dr. Abdulkareem Qasim Hussein
Abstract: External fixation a common method for treatment of open fractures with different degrees caused by many mechanisms. It is very vital in case of stabilization of fractures of poly-traumatized patients. Perfection in the fixation and good stability of the fixator will affect the outcome of treatment and induce early fracture healing. Faulty external fixation is a common problem in our locality. The aim of our study is to discover and categorize the faulty fixation and try to know the reasons behind these faults and what is best way to overcome it. We randomly studied (212) external fixators, 168 (79%) patients and 44 (21%) x-rays. These (168) patients were, 163 (97%) males and 5 (3%) females aged from (5-56) years and have been treated in many hospitals during the period from the 5th of October 2014 till the 10th of November 2015. (85%) of the patients that were treated by external fixation were due to military and mass casualties' injuries. (1145) pins distributed on (212) fixators were studied. X-rays of the fracture and the external fixation site have been taken and carefully examined. We found that 350 pins (35%) were over penetrated to the far cortex, 112 pins (9.7%) in the fracture, 45 pins (3.9%) just anchored in near cortex, 16 (1.3%) broken pins and 9 pins (0.7%) in the joint. Regarding the faults of the fixator as whole, we found that 33 fixators (15.6%) with pins far away from the fracture line, 88 fixators (41.5%) with pins not ideally separated on each segment of the fracture, 15 fixators (7.1%) with insufficient number of pins, 4 fixators (1.9%) with wrong decision for fixation, 7 fixators (3.3%) with wrong site for pin insertion. We discovered that 131 fixators (61.8%) were applied without accepted anatomical reduction to the fractured bone. As a final result of the (212) fixators we studied, there were (199) faulty external fixators which accounted for (94%). We concluded that the faulty external fixation in our locality is much more than what we expect. Lack of full awareness about the AO principles of external fixation is the main reason beyond this high rate of faulty fixation.
Pages: 19-23  |  257 Views  5 Downloads
How to cite this article:
Dr. Ameer Mohammad Muslem, Dr. Mohammed Naser Hussein, Dr. Abdulkareem Qasim Hussein. Faulty external fixation. Nat J Clin Orthop 2021;5(4):19-23 DOI: https://doi.org/10.33545/orthor.2021.v5.i4a.321
National Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics
Call for book chapter