Characteristics and Outcomes of Ankle Injuries in Winter and Summer Seasons-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Characteristics and Outcomes of Ankle Injuries in Winter and Summer Seasons

Published:2020-08-01 Issue:4 Volume:74 Page:237-243
ISSN:1407-009X
Container-title:Proceedings of the Latvian Academy of Sciences. Section B. Natural, Exact, and Applied Sciences.
language:en
Short-container-title:

Author:

Jakušonoka Ruta¹,Arcimovičs Toms²,Vinčela Gunita³,Jumtiņš Andris¹⁴,Čerņavska Ilze⁴,Pavāre Zane¹⁴

Affiliation:

1. Department of Orthopaedics , Rīga Stradiņš University , 18 Duntes Str., Rīga, LV-1005 , Latvia

2. Faculty of Residency , Rīga Stradiņš University , 16 Dzirciema Str., Rīga, LV-1005 , Latvia

3. Faculty of Medicine , Rīga Stradiņš University , 16 Dzirciema Str., Rīga, LV-1005 , Latvia

4. Hospital of Traumatology and Orthopaedics , 22 Duntes Str., Rīga, LV-1005 , Latvia

Abstract

Abstract The diagnostics and treatment of ankle trauma remain challenging as they enable the patients’ return to work and ability to perform daily activities. The aim of the study was to evaluate characteristics and outcomes of ankle injuries, focusing on the trauma mechanisms in winter and summer seasons. A retrospective study was conducted of 182 patients with ankle injuries, admitted to the Hospital of Traumatology and Orthopaedics in 2014, 2015, and 2016 from the months December to February, and from June to August. Patients with supination-external rotation (SER) type ankle injuries were included in the functional outcome evaluation. Our results suggested that most of the injuries were SER type, stage IV in both seasons, and that more than 2/3 of the SER type ankle injuries that needed surgery were in the winter season. In patients with tibiofibular syndesmosis (TFS) rupture the functional results were worse than in those without TFS rupture, but in winter and summer seasons they seemed to be without statistical difference.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Multidisciplinary

Link

https://www.sciendo.com/pdf/10.2478/prolas-2020-0038

Reference29 articles.

1. Boszczyk, A., Fudalej, M., Kwapisz, S., Błoński, M., Kiciński, M., Kordasiewicz, B., Rammelt, S. (2018). X-ray features to predict ankle fracture mechanism. Forensic Sci. Int., 291, 185–192.10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.08.042

2. Browner, B. D., Jupiter, J. B., Krettek, C., Anderson P. A. (2015). Skeletal Trauma.5th ed. W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia. 2704 pp.

3. Buckley, R. E., Moran, C. G., Apivatthakakul, T. (2017). AO Principles of Fracture Management. 3rd ed. AO Foundation, Switzerland, 933–955 pp.

4. Castillo, R. C., MacKenzie, E. J., Bosse, M. J., LEAP Study Group. (2011). Orthopaedic trauma clinical research: Is 2-year follow up necessary? Results from a longitudinal study of severe extremity trauma. J. Trauma, 71, 1726–1731.10.1097/TA.0b013e31822c1c33

5. da Fonseca, L. L., Nunes, I. G., Nogueira, R. R., Vieira Martins, G. E., Mesencio, A. C., Kobata, S. I. (2017). Reproducibility of the Lauge-Hansen, Danis-Weber, and AO classifications for ankle fractures Rev. Bras. Ortop.,53 (1), 101–106.