摘要
目的:总结尺骨鹰嘴骨折治疗体会,为选择合理方法提供依据。方法:对分别采用“8”字钢丝内固定(A组)、螺丝钉内固定(B组)、张力带钢丝内固定(C组)、鹰嘴钩外固定(D组)4种方法收治的162例该病患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析。结果:根据远期临床功能恢复情况疗效评价,达优良率者ABCD组分别为62.5％、65.6％、94.3％和96.2％,D组与C组疗效无显著差异(P>0.05),与A组和B组相差显著(P<0.05),C组优良率高于A组和B组(P<0.01)。结论:尺骨鹰嘴骨折四种固定疗法中“8”字钢丝法、螺丝钉法不应作为常规首选,张力带钢丝法有效可靠,鹰嘴钩法可作为最佳的选择。
Objective: Providing the warranty to the treatments choosing for ulna accipitral structure broken. Method: Analysis the clinic files about 162 patients for inter fastness by '8' steel wires (A group), screws (B group), strain tights(C group), and accipitral structure hook outer fastness. Result: According to the clinic resume functions at the specified future date, we divide the functions into four situations: excellent, good, ok and not good. We have estimated them and found that excellent results for A group is 62.5%, B is 65.6%, C is 94.3%, and D is 96.2%. By the unit analysis method stat, it is showed that the results about group D has no salience difference with C(P> 0.05), and it has the salience difference with group A and B(P < 0.05), the excellent examples in group C are much more than group A and B. Conclusion: Comparison with methods to cure the for ulna accipitral structure broken. '8' steel wires and screws should not be the first general choices. On the other hand, strain tights is the efficient way, and the accipitral structure hook outer fastness is the best method.
出处
《岭南急诊医学杂志》
2003年第3期202-203,205,共3页
Lingnan Journal of Emergency Medicine
