Distal Radius FracturesRepoDRF2NCT07697976
DRF Reposition Manual Reduction vs Finger-trap Traction
A study testing Finger-trap traction and Manual reduction in people with Distal Radius Fractures, run by Medical University Innsbruck at 1 site in Austria.
Trial summary
Participants with distal radius fractures treated conservatively with cast immobilization are assigned to one of two approaches: (1) closed reduction under local anesthesia (hematoma block) followed by traction and casting, or (2) traction and casting without formal reduction. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Distal Radius Fractures
- What is being tested?
- Finger-trap traction and Manual reduction
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 64 participants
- Where
- 1 siteAustria
- Study dates
- 1 Feb 2018to 31 Jul 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Dorsally tilted distal radius fracture (DRF) > 10° (intra-articular or extra-articular) Dorsal comminution of the distal radius fracture
- Fracture classification (AO), dorsally displaced:
- A2
- A3
- C1
- C2
- C3
Who cannot join
- Age under 18 years
- Non-displaced fractures of the radius
- Previous palmar displaced fractures of the radius
- Displacement greater than one shaft width
- Open fractures of the radius
- Bilateral radius fractures
Show all 14Show fewer
- History of a previous radius fracture
- Inability to provide informed consent due to physical or mental disability
- Unavailability for follow-up examinations (e.g., abroad, polytrauma)
- Lack of full legal capacity
- Alcohol or drug abuse
- Allergy to local anesthetics
- Median nerve irritation
- Pregnancy
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Austria1 site
Univ.-Klinik für Orthopädie und Traumatologie
Innsbruck, Tyrol, 6020
About this study
Official title: Unterschied Der Reposition in Bruchspaltanästhesie Zur Reposition im Aushang Bei Einer Distalen Radiusfraktur - Eine Prospektiv Randomisierte Studie
Participants with distal radius fractures treated conservatively with cast immobilization are assigned to one of two approaches: (1) closed reduction under local anesthesia (hematoma block) followed by traction and casting, or (2) traction and casting without formal reduction. While reduction aims to restore anatomical alignment, loss of reduction may occur during follow-up. The study evaluates whether reduction under local anesthesia provides any benefit over traction alone. The hypothesis is that both treatments result in comparable radiographic alignment and functional outcomes at the end of treatment.
Read the detailed description
Participants have sustained a distal radius fracture treated with cast immobilization. Two common conservative management approaches are being compared: (1) closed reduction under a local anesthetic (hematoma block) followed by traction and casting, and (2) immobilization after traction alone without formal reduction under anesthesia.
While the first method aims to restore anatomical alignment initially, loss of reduction may occur over time. The second method improves alignment but does not attempt full anatomical reduction.
The study hypothesis is that both approaches result in similar wrist alignment and functional outcomes after completion of treatment. The objective of this study is to determine whether reduction under local anesthesia followed by traction provides any advantage over traction alone in patients with distal radius fractures.
- Conditions
- Distal Radius Fractures
- Being tested
- Finger-trap traction, Manual reduction
- Keywords
- radius fracture, finger-trap traction, manual reduction, closed reduction
- Medical subject headings
- Wrist Fractures, Radius Fractures, Taxis Response
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Finger-trap tractionProcedure or surgery
15 minutes finger-trap traction only and then cast application
Manual reductionProcedure or surgery
Hematoma block 5 mL 2% lidocaine, followed by 15 minutes finger-trap traction and then manual reduction + cast application
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| R: Manual Reduction | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Procedure: Manual reduction |
| A: Finger-trap traction | Experimental | Not described Receives: Procedure: Finger-trap traction |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Pain difference between the groups
Comparison of the pain score in the course of the follow ups between the groups. 0= no pain 10 = worst pain (maximal pain)
Measured: From enrollment (Baseline) to the 12month Follow Up.
Secondary outcomes (6)
MHQ Hand Score (Patient reported outcome)
Difference in functional outcome measured with MHQ (Michigan Hand Outcome Questionaire) between the two groups. 0 points= very poor hand function / maximum impairment; 100 points → optimal hand function, no impairment.
Measured: Enrollment until 12 month follow up
PRWE - Patient reported outcome
Difference in functional outcome measured with PRWE (Patient-rated wrist evaluation) between the two groups. 0 points= optimal hand function, no impairment; 100 points → very poor hand function / maximum impairment.
Measured: Enrollment until 12month follow up
Grip strength
Difference in grip strength measured with dynanometer between the two groups. Grip strength is compared to the contralateral non-injured wrist.
Measured: 12 weeks until 12mo Follow up
Range of motion - functional outcome
Difference in functional outcome (range of motion) measured with goniometer after treatment between the two groups. Range of Motion is compared to the contraltaeral non-injured wrist.
Measured: 12 weeks until 12 mo follow-up
Radiological outcome
Difference in radiological outcome between the two groups; especially, dorsal tilt, radial inclination and ulnar variance.
Measured: Enrollment until 12 month Follow up
Complications
Complications between the two groups.
Measured: After treatment until 12 month Follow up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Jul 2026
- Study start1 Feb 2018
- Primary completion31 Jul 2022
- Study completion31 Jul 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Distal Radius FracturesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 64 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Medical University Innsbruck
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07697976
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- RepoDRF2
- Other IDs
- AOTrauma Research Austria 2020
- Acronym
- RepoDRF2
- Status last verified
- Jun 2026
- First submitted
- 22 Jun 2026
- Last updated
- 13 Jul 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Jul 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Unterschied Der Reposition in Bruchspaltanästhesie Zur Reposition im Aushang Bei Einer Distalen Radiusfraktur - Eine Prospektiv Randomisierte Studie
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07697976
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- RepoDRF2 / RepoDRF2
- Conditions
- Distal Radius Fractures
- Keywords
- radius fracture, finger-trap traction, manual reduction, closed reduction
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 64 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Medical University InnsbruckUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Feb 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Jul 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Jul 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Jul 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Participants with distal radius fractures treated conservatively with cast immobilization are assigned to one of two approaches: (1) closed reduction under local anesthesia (hematoma block) followed by traction and casting, or (2) traction and casting without formal reduction. While reduction aims to restore anatomical alignment, loss of reduction may occur during follow-up. The study evaluates whether reduction under local anesthesia provides any benefit over traction alone. The hypothesis is that both treatments result in comparable radiographic alignment and functional outcomes at the end of treatment.
Detailed description
Participants have sustained a distal radius fracture treated with cast immobilization. Two common conservative management approaches are being compared: (1) closed reduction under a local anesthetic (hematoma block) followed by traction and casting, and (2) immobilization after traction alone without formal reduction under anesthesia.
While the first method aims to restore anatomical alignment initially, loss of reduction may occur over time. The second method improves alignment but does not attempt full anatomical reduction.
The study hypothesis is that both approaches result in similar wrist alignment and functional outcomes after completion of treatment. The objective of this study is to determine whether reduction under local anesthesia followed by traction provides any advantage over traction alone in patients with distal radius fractures.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| R: Manual Reduction | Active comparator | Procedure: Manual reduction |
| A: Finger-trap traction | Experimental | Procedure: Finger-trap traction |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Dorsally tilted distal radius fracture (DRF) > 10° (intra-articular or extra-articular) Dorsal comminution of the distal radius fracture
- A2
- A3
- C1
- C2
Key exclusion criteria (14 listed)
- Age under 18 years
- Non-displaced fractures of the radius
- Previous palmar displaced fractures of the radius
- Displacement greater than one shaft width
- Open fractures of the radius
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Finger-trap traction15 minutes finger-trap traction only and then cast application | Procedure or surgery | A: Finger-trap traction |
| Manual reductionHematoma block 5 mL 2% lidocaine, followed by 15 minutes finger-trap traction and then manual reduction + cast application | Procedure or surgery | R: Manual Reduction |
Primary outcome
Pain difference between the groups
Time frame: From enrollment (Baseline) to the 12month Follow Up.
Comparison of the pain score in the course of the follow ups between the groups. 0= no pain 10 = worst pain (maximal pain)
6 secondary outcomes
MHQ Hand Score (Patient reported outcome)
Time frame: Enrollment until 12 month follow up
PRWE - Patient reported outcome
Time frame: Enrollment until 12month follow up
Grip strength
Time frame: 12 weeks until 12mo Follow up
Range of motion - functional outcome
Time frame: 12 weeks until 12 mo follow-up
Radiological outcome
Time frame: Enrollment until 12 month Follow up
Complications
Time frame: After treatment until 12 month Follow up
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Jul 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Distal Radius Fractures
RecruitingPhase 1
Impact of Early ADL Education on Outcomes Post DRF ORIF
Distal Radius Fractures
Recruiting
Optimal Duration of Longitudinal Mechanical Traction in Displaced Radius Fractures: a Prospective Non-inferiority Study
Distal Radius Fracture
Recruiting
Home-Based Photobiomodulation Effects in the Postoperative Period of Distal Radius Fractures
Distal Radius Fracture
Not yet recruiting
X-BS Ortho Bone Graft Study
Orthopedic Disorder, Trauma Injury
Active, not recruitingPhase 4
Brachial Plexus Nerve Block Versus Haematoma Block for Closed Reduction of Distal Radius Fracture in Adults - The BLOCK Trial. A Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial.
Distal Radius Fractures, Fracture Dislocation
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Finger-trap traction and Manual reduction in people with Distal Radius Fractures, run by Medical University Innsbruck at 1 site in Austria.
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 7 inclusion and 14 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 Jul 2026. 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 Austria. 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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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?
Pain difference between the groups (time frame: From enrollment (Baseline) to the 12month Follow Up.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 13 Jul 2026.