| Table 4:Comparison of this study with similar studies. | |||||||||
Study
author |
Study
period
(Years) |
Total
patients
(n) |
Sex |
Mean age
of fixation
(years) |
Type of
Im¬plant
Used |
Average
time to
Radiologi¬cal
union
Functional
out-come
assessment
criteria Functional
outcome Complication | |||
Yalcinkaya
M et. Al.
[1] |
8 yrs |
45 |
M=35 F= 10 |
10 |
Rush pins,
Kirschner wire |
6 -10 weeks |
Price criteria |
Excellent=
82.2% Good = 17.8% |
Major=2 (4.44%) Minor=15 (33.3%) |
Flynn JM et
al. [2] |
11 yrs |
103 |
Not
mentioned |
10.6 |
Titanium nails,
Kirschner wire |
6.9 - 8.6 weeks |
Children
hospital of
Pheladelphia
forearm
fracture
fixation
outcome
classification |
Excellent=
77.7% Fair = 14.6% Poor= 7.8% |
Major = 4 (3.8%) Minor= 11(10.6%) |
Richter D
et al. [3] |
2 yrs |
30 |
M=18 F= 12 |
Not
men¬tioned |
Titanium Nails |
13 weeks |
Tscherne score |
Excellent=
80% Good= 16.6% Fair= 3.3% |
Minor=
4(13.3%) |
Shoemaker
SD et al.
[4] |
8 yrs |
32 |
M=22 F= 10 |
8.8 |
Kirschner wire |
12 weeks |
EPrice criteria |
Excellent=
96.8% Good= 3.2% |
Major= 2 (6.2%) Minor=7(21.8%) Minor= 8 (16%) |
Parajuli NP
et al. |
3 yrs |
50 |
M=38 F=12 |
10.4 |
Rush pins |
8 weeks |
Price criteria |
Excellent=
94% Good = 6% |
Minor= 8 (16%) |
This study |
3 years |
79 |
M=52 F=27 |
10.4 |
FFlexible
intramedullary
nail |
9 weeks |
ExPrice criteria |
Excellent=74
(94%) Good=5 (6%) |
Major=0 Minor= 13 (16%) |