The psychological impact of external fixation using the Ilizarov or Orthofix LRS method to treat tibial osteomyelitis with a bone defect

被引:60
作者
Abulaiti, Alimujiang [1 ]
Yilihamu, Yilizati [1 ]
Yasheng, Tayierjiang [2 ]
Alike, Yamuhanmode [1 ]
Yusufu, Aihemaitijiang [1 ]
机构
[1] Xinjiang Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 1, Dept Microrepair & Reconstruct, Urumqi 830000, Xinjiang, Peoples R China
[2] Xinjiang Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 1, Dept Orthopaed, Urumqi 830000, Xinjiang, Peoples R China
来源
INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED | 2017年 / 48卷 / 12期
关键词
External fixation; Orthofix LRS; Ilizarov fixation; SCL-90-R; TRAUMA; RECONSTRUCTION; COMPLICATIONS; NONUNION;
D O I
10.1016/j.injury.2017.10.036
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Objective: To examine the psychological impact of external fixation for a tibial bone defect due to osteomyelitis, and to compare the Orthofix limb reconstruction system (LRS) with the Ilizarov external fixator. Materials and methods: The SCL-90-R questionnaire was administered at four different time points (before surgery, while patients wore the external fixation device, when the device was removed, and two to three months after). The scores at the four time points were compared, as were the two different methods of external fixation (Orthofix LRS vs. Ilizarov). Results: The patients experienced a significant adverse impact on their mental health, with the worst outcomes at Time 2 (while wearing the external fixator), but with some negative effects still present even several months after removal of the fixation device. Although the Orthofix LRS and Ilizarov groups showed similar mental health scores at Time 1 (preoperatively) and Time 3 (upon removal of the fixation device), the Orthofix LRS was associated with better scores, specifically in the Hostility (Time 2), Phobic Anxiety (Time 2), Psychoticism (Times 2 and 4), and Other (Time 2) sub-scores, as well as the total score (Times 2 and 4). Conclusions: Although both Ilizarov and Orthofix LRS fixation resolved the bone defects, external fixation had a negative impact on the patients' mental health, which persisted even after removal of the devices. Although both methods led to negative effects on the patients' mental, the impact of the Orthofix LRS was less severe. (c) 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:2842 / 2846
页数:5
相关论文
共 36 条
[31]  
Testa A, 2013, EUR REV MED PHARMACO, V17, P55
[32]  
Vranceanu Ana-Maria, 2014, J Bone Joint Surg Am, V96, pe20, DOI 10.2106/JBJS.L.00479
[33]  
WAGNER H, 1978, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P125
[34]  
Yildiz Cemil, 2005, Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc, V39, P59
[35]   Outcomes of post-traumatic tibial osteomyelitis treated with an Orthofix LRS versus an Ilizarov external fixator [J].
Yilihamu, Yilizati ;
Keremu, Ajimu ;
Abulaiti, Alimujiang ;
Maimaiti, Xiayimaierdan ;
Ren, Peng ;
Yusufu, Aihemaitijiang .
INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED, 2017, 48 (07) :1636-1643
[36]  
Yin P, 2014, ACTA ORTHOP BELG, V80, P426