...
首页> 外文期刊>Pakistan journal of medical sciences. >Comparison of two main treatment modalities for acute ankle sprain
【24h】

Comparison of two main treatment modalities for acute ankle sprain

机译:急性踝关节扭伤的两个主要治疗方式的比较

获取原文
           

摘要

Objective: Acute ankle sprains are one of the most common injuries in emergency departments. Immobilization is widely accepted as the basic treatment modality for acute ankle sprains; however, immobilization method remains controversial. In this study, we aimed to compare two treatment modalities: splint and elastic bandage for the management of acute ankle sprains.Methods: This prospective study was conducted in the emergency department. Fifty-one consecutive patients who were admitted to the emergency department owing to the complaint of ankle sprain and who were treated with an elastic bandage or a splint were included in the study. After bone injury was ruled out, treatment choice was left to the on-shift physicians’ discretion. The extent of edema was evaluated before and after the treatment by using a small, graduated container filled with warm water. Volume differences were calculated by immersing both lower extremities in a container filled to a constant level. Pain was evaluated using the visual analogue scale.Results: There were 25 patients in the elastic bandage group and 26 patients in the splint group. VAS scores of these groups before and after the treatment were similar. Although edema size before and after the treatment were similar between the groups, edema size reduction was significantly more in the elastic bandage group [p=0,025].Conclusions: This study showed that treatment of acute ankle sprains with an elastic bandage was more effective than splint in reducing edema. Therefore, an elastic bandage could be preferred over a splint for the treatment of acute ankle sprains.doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.316.8210 How to cite this: Bilgic S, Durusu M, Aliyev B, Akpancar S, Ersen O, Yasar SM, et al. Comparison of two main treatment modalities for acute ankle sprain. Pak J Med Sci 2015;31(6):1496-1499. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.316.8210This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
机译:目的:急性踝关节扭矩是急诊部门最常见的伤害之一。固定化被广泛接受作为急性踝螺纹的基本治疗方式;然而,固定方法仍然存在争议。在这项研究中,我们旨在比较两种治疗方式:抗痉挛和弹性绷带用于管理急性踝螺旋。方法:这项前瞻性研究在急诊部门进行。在研究中包括抱怨踝关节扭伤的五十一名连续患者,他们被抱怨踝关节扭伤或夹层治疗。排除骨损伤后,将治疗选择留给了换档医生的自由裁量权。通过使用填充有温水的小型渐变容器,在处理之前和之后评估水肿的程度。通过浸入填充到恒定水平的容器中的两个下肢来计算体积差异。使用视觉模拟量表评估疼痛。结果:弹性绷带组中有25名患者和夹板组中的26例患者。治疗前后这些组的VAS分数相似。虽然治疗前后的水肿大小在组之间相似,但在弹性绷带组中,水肿尺寸减少显着更多[P = 0.025]。结论:该研究表明,用弹性绷带治疗急性踝螺纹更有效在减少水肿中的夹板。因此,可以在夹板上优选弹性绷带,用于治疗急性踝螺旋.DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.316.8210如何引用这一点:毕吉加S,Durusu M,Aliyev B, Akpancar s,ersen o,yasar sm,等。急性踝扭伤两种主要治疗方式的比较。 Pak J Med Sci 2015; 31(6):1496-1499。 Doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.316.8210这是一个开放式访问文章,根据Creative Commons归因许可(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)分发只要正确引用原始工作,允许在任何媒体中不受限制使用,分发和再现。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号