Demographics and Functional Outcome of Toe Fractures
Toe fractures are common; however, there are few data on demographics and functional outcome. We studied outcomes in 339 consecutive patients with toe fractures treated between January 2006 and September 2008. Two hundred and sixty-four patients, aged 16 to 75, were mailed an outcome questionnaire, and overall subjective satisfaction with the outcome of treatment was measured using a visual analog scale (VAS). Most frequently affected were the first (38%) and fifth (30%) toes, and most (75.6%) of the fractures were caused by stubbing or crush injury. More than 95% of the fractures were displaced less than 2 mm, and all of the fractures were treated conservatively. The questionnaire was returned by 141 (53%) patients with a median follow-up of 27 months. Respondents were female in 57.4% of cases and had a median age of 45 years. The median AOFAS score was 100 (P25, P75= 93,100) points; the median VAS was 10 (P25, P75= 8, 10) points. Univariate regression analysis revealed no statistically significant associations between outcome and the particular toe or phalanx involved, number of fractured toes, fracture type and location, articular involvement, gender, age, body mass index, smoking habits, and the presence of diabetes mellitus. Satisfaction VAS was dependent on age (P = .047) and gender (P = .049) in the multivariate analysis. The AOFAS midfoot score was not influenced by any of the covariates. This is the first epidemiological investigation using 2 outcome-scoring systems to determine function and satisfaction following treatment of toe fractures.
|Keywords||Epidemiology, Foot, Fracture, Injury, Outcome, Phalanx, Toe|
|Persistent URL||dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.jfas.2011.02.003, hdl.handle.net/1765/25625|
|Series||Surgery and Traumatology|
|Journal||The Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery|
Vliet-Koppert, S.T, Cakir, H, van Lieshout, E.M.M, de Vries, M.R, van der Elst, M, & Schepers, T. (2011). Demographics and Functional Outcome of Toe Fractures. The Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery, 50(3), 307–310. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2011.02.003