Intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with the trochanteric fixation nail and sliding hip screw.

J. Brian Gill, Layne Jensen, Paul C. Chin, Poyan Rafiei, Kartheek Reddy, Robert C. Schutt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The primary treatment options for intertrochanteric hip fractures are a sliding hip screw (SHS) and an intramedullary device, with each having its own advantages and disadvantages. The authors retrospectively compared all intertrochanteric hip fractures between 2003 and 2005 using a cephalomedullary nail--the trochanteric fixation nail (TFN)--to those using a SHS. Outcome measures included the following parameters: age, gender, fracture classification, operation time, blood loss, transfusions, complications, follow-up, length of stay, and hospital cost. A total of 95 patients were included in the study (51 SHS and 44 TFN). The two groups were similar in age (p = .52), blood loss (p = .20), follow-up (p = .13), length of stay (p = .63), and hospital costs (p = .70). The TFN procedure required shorter operative times (56.5 min, p < .004) and was used in more complex fracture patterns (p < .03). The SHS group had fewer blood transfusions (1.2 units, p < .0008). The SHS group had a higher complication rate of 19.6%, versus the TFN group's 11.4% rate (p = .13). The TFN is an appropriate and acceptable treatment method for intertrochanteric hip fractures.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)62-66
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of surgical orthopaedic advances
Volume16
Issue number2
StatePublished - Jun 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Hip Fractures
Nails
Hip
Hospital Costs
Blood Transfusion
Length of Stay
Operative Time
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Equipment and Supplies
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Gill, J. B., Jensen, L., Chin, P. C., Rafiei, P., Reddy, K., & Schutt, R. C. (2007). Intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with the trochanteric fixation nail and sliding hip screw. Journal of surgical orthopaedic advances, 16(2), 62-66.

Intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with the trochanteric fixation nail and sliding hip screw. / Gill, J. Brian; Jensen, Layne; Chin, Paul C.; Rafiei, Poyan; Reddy, Kartheek; Schutt, Robert C.

In: Journal of surgical orthopaedic advances, Vol. 16, No. 2, 06.2007, p. 62-66.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gill, JB, Jensen, L, Chin, PC, Rafiei, P, Reddy, K & Schutt, RC 2007, 'Intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with the trochanteric fixation nail and sliding hip screw.', Journal of surgical orthopaedic advances, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 62-66.
Gill, J. Brian ; Jensen, Layne ; Chin, Paul C. ; Rafiei, Poyan ; Reddy, Kartheek ; Schutt, Robert C. / Intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with the trochanteric fixation nail and sliding hip screw. In: Journal of surgical orthopaedic advances. 2007 ; Vol. 16, No. 2. pp. 62-66.
@article{0e6d487199a1481ba2306d5f346dd832,
title = "Intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with the trochanteric fixation nail and sliding hip screw.",
abstract = "The primary treatment options for intertrochanteric hip fractures are a sliding hip screw (SHS) and an intramedullary device, with each having its own advantages and disadvantages. The authors retrospectively compared all intertrochanteric hip fractures between 2003 and 2005 using a cephalomedullary nail--the trochanteric fixation nail (TFN)--to those using a SHS. Outcome measures included the following parameters: age, gender, fracture classification, operation time, blood loss, transfusions, complications, follow-up, length of stay, and hospital cost. A total of 95 patients were included in the study (51 SHS and 44 TFN). The two groups were similar in age (p = .52), blood loss (p = .20), follow-up (p = .13), length of stay (p = .63), and hospital costs (p = .70). The TFN procedure required shorter operative times (56.5 min, p < .004) and was used in more complex fracture patterns (p < .03). The SHS group had fewer blood transfusions (1.2 units, p < .0008). The SHS group had a higher complication rate of 19.6{\%}, versus the TFN group's 11.4{\%} rate (p = .13). The TFN is an appropriate and acceptable treatment method for intertrochanteric hip fractures.",
author = "Gill, {J. Brian} and Layne Jensen and Chin, {Paul C.} and Poyan Rafiei and Kartheek Reddy and Schutt, {Robert C.}",
year = "2007",
month = "6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "62--66",
journal = "Journal of the Southern Orthopaedic Association",
issn = "1548-825X",
publisher = "Data Trace Publishing Co.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with the trochanteric fixation nail and sliding hip screw.

AU - Gill, J. Brian

AU - Jensen, Layne

AU - Chin, Paul C.

AU - Rafiei, Poyan

AU - Reddy, Kartheek

AU - Schutt, Robert C.

PY - 2007/6

Y1 - 2007/6

N2 - The primary treatment options for intertrochanteric hip fractures are a sliding hip screw (SHS) and an intramedullary device, with each having its own advantages and disadvantages. The authors retrospectively compared all intertrochanteric hip fractures between 2003 and 2005 using a cephalomedullary nail--the trochanteric fixation nail (TFN)--to those using a SHS. Outcome measures included the following parameters: age, gender, fracture classification, operation time, blood loss, transfusions, complications, follow-up, length of stay, and hospital cost. A total of 95 patients were included in the study (51 SHS and 44 TFN). The two groups were similar in age (p = .52), blood loss (p = .20), follow-up (p = .13), length of stay (p = .63), and hospital costs (p = .70). The TFN procedure required shorter operative times (56.5 min, p < .004) and was used in more complex fracture patterns (p < .03). The SHS group had fewer blood transfusions (1.2 units, p < .0008). The SHS group had a higher complication rate of 19.6%, versus the TFN group's 11.4% rate (p = .13). The TFN is an appropriate and acceptable treatment method for intertrochanteric hip fractures.

AB - The primary treatment options for intertrochanteric hip fractures are a sliding hip screw (SHS) and an intramedullary device, with each having its own advantages and disadvantages. The authors retrospectively compared all intertrochanteric hip fractures between 2003 and 2005 using a cephalomedullary nail--the trochanteric fixation nail (TFN)--to those using a SHS. Outcome measures included the following parameters: age, gender, fracture classification, operation time, blood loss, transfusions, complications, follow-up, length of stay, and hospital cost. A total of 95 patients were included in the study (51 SHS and 44 TFN). The two groups were similar in age (p = .52), blood loss (p = .20), follow-up (p = .13), length of stay (p = .63), and hospital costs (p = .70). The TFN procedure required shorter operative times (56.5 min, p < .004) and was used in more complex fracture patterns (p < .03). The SHS group had fewer blood transfusions (1.2 units, p < .0008). The SHS group had a higher complication rate of 19.6%, versus the TFN group's 11.4% rate (p = .13). The TFN is an appropriate and acceptable treatment method for intertrochanteric hip fractures.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34547481347&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34547481347&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 62

EP - 66

JO - Journal of the Southern Orthopaedic Association

JF - Journal of the Southern Orthopaedic Association

SN - 1548-825X

IS - 2

ER -