Search

Summary: The purpose of this paper is to describe rates of forearm fractures in adults in Norway 2008–2019. Incidence rate of distal forearm fractures declined over time in both sexes. Forearm fracture constitute a significant health burden and prevention strategies are needed. Purpose: To assess age- and sex-specific incidence rates, and time trends for forearm fractures in Norway, and compare these with incidence rates in other Nordic countries. Methods: Data on all patients aged 20–107 years with forearm fractures treated in Norwegian hospitals from 2008 to 2019 was retrieved from the Norwegian Patient Registry. Fractures were identified based on International Classification of Disease 10th revision code S52. Age- and sex-specific incidence rates and changes in incidence rates were calculated. Results: We identified 181,784 forearm fractures in 45,628,418 person-years. Mean annual forearm fracture incidence rates per 100,000 person-years were 398 (95% CI 390–407) for all, 565 (95% CI 550–580) for women, and 231 (95% CI 228–234) for men above 20 years. Mean annual number of forearm fractures was 15,148 (95% CI 14,575–15,722). From 2008 to 2019, age-adjusted total incidence rates of forearm fractures S52 diagnoses declined by 3.5% (incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 0.997 (95% CI 0.994–0.999)) in men. The corresponding decline in women was not significant (IRR: 0.999 (95% CI 0.997–1.002)). In the same period, the age-adjusted incidence rates of distal forearm fractures declined by 7.0% in men (IRR = 0.930; 95% CI 0.886–0.965) and 4.7% in women (IRR = 0.953; 95% CI 0.919–0.976). The incidence rates of distal forearm fractures were similar to rates in Sweden and Finland. Conclusion: Age-adjusted incidence rates of distal forearm fractures in both sexes declined over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: The validity of forearm fracture diagnoses recorded in five Norwegian hospitals was investigated using image reports and medical records as gold standard. A relatively high completeness and correctness of the diagnoses was found. Algorithms used to define forearm fractures in administrative data should depend on study purpose. Purpose: In Norway, forearm fractures are routinely recorded in the Norwegian Patient Registry (NPR). However, these data have not been validated. Data from patient administrative systems (PAS) at hospitals are sent unabridged to NPR. By using data from PAS, we aimed to examine (1) the validity of the forearm fracture diagnoses and (2) the usefulness of washout periods, follow-up codes, and procedure codes to define incident forearm fracture cases. Methods: This hospital-based validation study included women and men aged ≥ 19 years referred to five hospitals for treatment of a forearm fracture during selected periods in 2015. Administrative data for the ICD-10 forearm fracture code S52 (with all subgroups) in PAS and the medical records were reviewed. X-ray and computed tomography (CT) reports from examinations of forearms were reviewed independently and linked to the data from PAS. Sensitivity and positive predictive values (PPVs) were calculated using image reports and/or review of medical records as gold standard. Results: Among the 8482 reviewed image reports and medical records, 624 patients were identified with an incident forearm fracture during the study period. The sensitivity of PAS registrations was 90.4% (95% CI: 87.8–92.6). The PPV increased from 73.9% (95% CI: 70.6–77.0) in crude data to 90.5% (95% CI: 88.0–92.7) when using a washout period of 6 months. Using procedure codes and follow-up codes in addition to 6-months washout increased the PPV to 94.0%, but the sensitivity fell to 69.0%. Conclusion: A relatively high sensitivity of forearm fracture diagnoses was found in PAS. PPV varied depending on the algorithms used to define cases. Choice of algorithm should therefore depend on study purposes. The results give useful measures of forearm fracture diagnoses from administrative patient registers. Depending on local coding practices and treatment pathways, we infer that the findings are relevant to other fracture diagnoses and registers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fifty-one patients were operated with reconstruction for an isolated PCL injury from 1997 to 2005. Forty-three of these patients were followed during a median period of 48 months (17-109). Median time from injury to surgery was 18 months (2-368). Five patients were operated within the first 6 months after the injury. Nineteen patients had a BPTB autograft, 24 had a hamstring tendon autograft, and seven patients in the hamstring group had a double-bundle femoral fixation. Clinical assessment included Lysholm knee score, International Knee Documentation Committee 2000 (IKDC) scores, Cincinnati score, Tegner score, KOOS score, VAS score, stress radiographs, and a functional test. The median Lysholm score at follow-up was 80 (32-95). Median Tegner score before injury was 7 (1-10) and at follow-up 6 (0-9). Median Cincinnati and IKDC 2000 scores were 74 (12-100) and 63 (24-100), respectively. The mean VAS for subjective assessment of knee function was 67.6 (SD = 22.9). The radiologically measured difference in posterior tibial translation between operated and non-injured knees was mean 8.4 mm (SD = 4.8). Four different functional tests showed function of the operated leg from 92% (25-128) to 95% (15-124) compared to the opposite leg. This study shows good functional outcome after reconstruction for isolated rupture of the posterior cruciate ligament. However, pain and instability are still a problem, as only three patients reported full Lysholm subscore indicating full stability, and only four patients reported full subscore indicating no knee pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]