The use of a postoperative brace may be beneficial after open reduction and internal fixation of tibial plateau fractures. However, bracing has potential drawbacks related to cost, fitting, wound complications, and compliance. We hypothesized that no difference will be found between patients with and without bracing after open reduction and internal fixation of tibial plateau fractures.
In this prospective, comparative trial, patients were randomized to 6 weeks of bracing or no bracing after open reduction and internal fixation of tibial plateau fractures. Functional, subjective, and radiographic outcomes were recorded. Patients with an open physis, unstable ligamentous injuries, extensor mechanism disruption, and/or <6 months of prospective outcome data were excluded.
The 24 patients with bracing (average age, 50 ± 16 years; 14 women and 10 men) were compared with the 25 patients without bracing (average age, 51 ± 12 years [P = 0.74]; 9 women and 16 men). No statistically significant differences were found in most of the functional, subjective, and radiographic outcomes, including fracture characteristics, complications, postoperative range of motion, Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form scores, and union rates. In the nonbraced group, one patient had late joint collapse with valgus malalignment (>10°). Two wound complications occurred in the braced group and four wound complications occurred in the nonbraced group, but this difference was not statistically significant.
Improvements in conventional and locking plate technology have allowed more reliable rigid internal fixation of tibial plateau fractures. However, the use of a brace for postoperative rehabilitation after open reduction and internal fixation of tibial plateau fractures continues to be debated.
Our prospective study showed no statistically significant difference between bracing and no bracing after open reduction and internal fixation of tibial plateau fractures in terms of functional, subjective, and radiographic outcomes.
Therapeutic level II.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 April 2018.
All research outputs
#23,329,605
of 34,411,289 outputs
Outputs from JAAOS: Journal of the American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons
#1,608
of 2,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,382
of 380,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAAOS: Journal of the American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons
#19
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,411,289 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,682 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 380,407 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
