AzTrials
AzTrials

Distal Radius FractureNCT02679066

Short Forearm Casting Versus Below-elbow Splinting for Acute Immobilization of Distal Radius Fractures

A study testing Sugar-tong splint and Short forearm cast in people with Distal Radius Fracture, run by Johns Hopkins University at 1 site in United States.

Terminated

Stopped early. The study ended before it was planned to and will not resume.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

There is no consensus regarding the need to immobilize the elbow in immediate immobilization of closed distal radius fractures post-reduction. Decreased functionality of the upper extremity is a notable morbidity associated with below-elbow splinting of distal radius fractures post-reduction. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 100 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Distal Radius Fracture
What is being tested?
Sugar-tong splint and Short forearm cast
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
200 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
Jan 2014to Feb 2019
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 to 100 years
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Adult > 18 years of age
  • Closed fracture
  • Isolated injury
  • No prior injury to ipsilateral forearm
  • Less than or equal to two attempts at reduction

Who cannot join

  • Ipsilateral upper extremity injury
  • Open injury or neurovascular compromise
  • Greater than two attempts at reduction
  • Presentation greater than 24 hours after injury

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • Johns Hopkins University

    Baltimore, Maryland

Other trials in United States

About this study

There is no consensus regarding the need to immobilize the elbow in immediate immobilization of closed distal radius fractures post-reduction. Decreased functionality of the upper extremity is a notable morbidity associated with below-elbow splinting of distal radius fractures post-reduction. Few studies have provided evidence comparing sugar tong splinting versus short-arm casting as methods of immediate post-reduction immobilization. The study will randomize patients with close distal radius fractures to short forearm casting versus sugar tong splinting with close follow up including radiographic and clinical evaluation.

This will provide guidance regarding the need for short forearm cast immobilization versus sugar tong splinting in early maintenance of reduction of closed distal radius fractures, as well as functional effects of sugar tong splinting versus short forearm casting.

Read the detailed description

Objectives (include all primary and secondary objectives)

To determine the success of sugar tong splinting versus short arm casting for maintenance of reduction of closed distal radius fractures and to compare the functional outcomes in patients treated with sugar tong splinting versus short forearm casting as guidance for immediate post-reduction immobilization of these fractures.

Primary objectives:

Background (briefly describe pre-clinical and clinical data, current experience with procedures, drug or device, and any other relevant information to justify the research)

  • Koval et al. randomized patients to long-arm versus short-arm splinting of post-reduction closed distal radius fractures and reported comparable maintenance of reduction with better functional scores in patients immobilized in a short-arm splint and thus recommended this method for immediate post-reduction immobilization of closed distal radius fractures (Bong et al. 2006).
  • Grafstein et al. randomized 101 adult patients with closed distal radius fractures to sugar tong splinting versus above-elbow circumferential casting versus above-elbow volar-dorsal splinting for immediate post-reduction immobilization and followed patients closely for 3 to 4 weeks. They reported no significant difference in loss of reduction, pain scores, range of motion, or Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) between the three methods of immobilization and thus recommended treatment with any method with which the treating physician is most comfortable (Grafstein et al., 2010).
  • Millet and Rushton randomized 99 women with closed distal radius fractures to below elbow plaster casts versus initial plaster casting followed by flexible casting to allow early joint range of motion and reported increased comfort, grip scores and joint mobility in early treatment period without negative effects of early motion and thus concluded that early mobilization can be a beneficial treatment option (Millet and Rushton, 1995).
  • Pool prospectively studied range of motion and radiographic parameters over a two year period in over 200 patients with Colles' fractures treated with five different combinations of above- and below-elbow immobilization and concluded that while all patients went onto union and adequate function, those immobilized in above-elbow plaster lost some degree of supination. He found no benefit to above-elbow immobilization and recommended only below-elbow post-reduction immobilization (Pool, 1973).
  • Sarmiento reviewed a case series of 44 patients with intra-articular distal radius fractures treated initially with an above-elbow cast initially and transitioned early to a brace allowing elbow and wrist range of motion while restricting pronation-supination and concluded that although fracture collapse did occur, functional results were good and the early mobilization reduced the stiffness and incapacitation associated with treatment of distal radius fractures (Sarmiento et al.)

Study Procedures

  1. Study design, including the sequence and timing of study procedures (distinguish research procedures from those that are part of routine care).
  2. Study duration and number of study visits required of research participants.
  3. Blinding, including justification for blinding or not blinding the trial, if applicable.
  4. Justification of why participants will not receive routine care or will have current therapy stopped.
  5. Justification for inclusion of a placebo or non-treatment group.
  6. Definition of treatment failure or participant removal criteria.
  7. Description of what happens to participants receiving therapy when study ends or if a participant's participation in the study ends prematurely.
  • Prospective, randomized, controlled trial
  • One hundred twenty adult patients with closed fractures of the distal radius will be randomized to below-elbow, sugar-tong splinting versus short arm casting for immediate post-reduction immobilization.
  • Residents will undergo a teaching session specifically for instruction on sugar tong splinting versus short arm casting. On-call resident will have access to an electronic folder containing randomization of patient to sugar tong splint versus bi-valved short arm cast. All reductions will be performed under local hematoma block with 1% lidocaine and traction and less than three attempts at reduction.
  • Patients will follow up at one, two and four weeks for repeat Anteroposterior (AP) and lateral radiographs of the forearm to measure radiographic parameters to determine maintenance of reduction and will complete the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score (DASH) for functional scoring of the upper extremity at two weeks.
  • Maintenance of reduction, as defined below, will be compared between splint constructs overall and in stable versus unstable fractures in each immobilization group. Specific changes in radial height, radial inclination and volar tilt as continuous variables will also be compared, as will DASH scores measuring functionality.
  • Maintenance of reduction will be defined as: loss of reduction of < 2 mm radial height, < 5 degrees of radial inclination or < 10 degrees of volar tilt and/or < 2 mm intra-articular step off, in follow up radiographs as compared to immediate post-reduction radiographs (Bong et al., 2006).
  • Unstable fractures will be defined as, at injury: > 4 mm radial shortening, > 10 degrees dorsal tilt, radial-ulnar translation of radius > 2 mm, dorsal comminution > 50% diameter of radius, > 2mm intra-articular displacement (Bong et al., 2006; Stoffelen and Broos, 1998). Fractures meeting these criteria will undergo open reduction, internal fixation (ORIF) after reduction and at a later time. However, reduction parameters and maintenance of reduction will be evaluated and compared for both splinting techniques until ORIF.

Study Statistics

  1. Primary outcome variable.
  2. Secondary outcome variables.
  3. Statistical plan including sample size justification and interim data analysis.
  4. Early stopping rules.

Primary outcome variable: Maintenance of reduction

Secondary outcome variables: DASH scores, Radiographic parameters analyzed individually: radial height, radial inclination, volar tilt

Statistical plan including sample size: Sample size was calculated based on standard deviations for the above-noted outcomes variables reported in the literature and selected a sample size based on the largest calculated sample size. This was increased from 167 to 200 to account for expected dropout.

Early stopping rules: Less than 50% patient follow-up.

Risks

  1. Medical risks, listing all procedures, their major and minor risks and expected frequency.
  2. Steps taken to minimize the risks.
  3. Plan for reporting unanticipated problems or study deviations.
  4. Legal risks such as the risks that would be associated with breach of confidentiality.
  5. Financial risks to the participants.
  • No medical risks outside of standard of care.
  • Patients will be treated with standard of care.
  • Research committee of Department of Orthopaedic Surgery follows the progress of the project.
  • No legal risks.
  • No financial risks.

Benefits

  1. Description of the probable benefits for the participant and for society.

Below-elbow splinting is associated with decreased morbidity

Being tested
Sugar-tong splint, Short forearm cast
Medical subject headings
Wrist Fractures

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Sugar-tong splintDevice

    Plaster immobilization including the elbow

  • Short forearm castDevice

    Fiberglass immobilization with elbow free

Study groups in NCT02679066
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Sugar-tong splintActive comparatorPatients are placed in a sugar-tong splint for immobilization of the distal radius fracture.
Receives: Device: Sugar-tong splint
Short Forearm CastActive comparatorPatients are placed in a short forearm cast, with bivalve, for immobilization of the distal radius fracture.
Receives: Device: Short forearm cast

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Number of Participants With Maintenance of Reduction

    Radiologic parameters to include radial height, radial inclination and volar tilt will be measured from post-immobilization radiographs at presentation, one week, two weeks and four weeks. Maintenance of reduction will be defined as: loss of reduction of < 2 mm radial height, < 5 degrees of radial inclination or < 10 degrees of volar tilt and/or < 2 mm intra-articular step off, in follow up radiographs as compared to immediate post-reduction radiographs.

    Measured: one month

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Score - Upper Extremity Function

    This is a validated survey of upper extremity function that is administered at the two week follow up visit. The DASH is a 30-item self-reported questionnaire in which the response options are presented as 5-point Likert scales. Scores range from 0 (no disability) to 100 (most severe disability).

    Measured: Two weeks

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted10 Feb 2016 (estimated)
  2. Study startJan 2014
  3. Primary completionFeb 2019
  4. Study completionFeb 2019

Why it stopped: lack of consistent enrollment, follow up and results

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
200 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT02679066
Sponsor's protocol ID
IRB00087273
Status last verified
Mar 2020
First submitted
27 Jan 2016
Last updated
25 Mar 2020
Data monitoring committee
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Sarmiento A, Pratt GW, Berry NC, Sinclair WF. Colles' fractures. Functional bracing in supination. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1975 Apr;57(3):311-7.

    PubMed 1123382
  • Bong MR, Egol KA, Leibman M, Koval KJ. A comparison of immediate postreduction splinting constructs for controlling initial displacement of fractures of the distal radius: a prospective randomized study of long-arm versus short-arm splinting. J Hand Surg Am. 2006 May-Jun;31(5):766-70. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2006.01.016.

    PubMed 16713840
  • Grafstein E, Stenstrom R, Christenson J, Innes G, MacCormack R, Jackson C, Stothers K, Goetz T. A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing circumferential casting and splinting in displaced Colles fractures. CJEM. 2010 May;12(3):192-200. doi: 10.1017/s1481803500012239.

    PubMed 20522283
  • Pool C. Colles's fracture. A prospective study of treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1973 Aug;55(3):540-4. No abstract available.

    PubMed 4125714
  • Millett PJ, Rushton N. Early mobilization in the treatment of Colles' fracture: a 3 year prospective study. Injury. 1995 Dec;26(10):671-5. doi: 10.1016/0020-1383(95)00146-8.

    PubMed 8745803

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Sugar-tong splint and Short forearm cast in people with Distal Radius Fracture, run by Johns Hopkins University at 1 site in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Mar 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 25 Mar 2020). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Number of Participants With Maintenance of Reduction (time frame: one month). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02679066, which also lists 5 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 25 Mar 2020.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in
Clinical Trial NCT02679066 | AzTrials