Talk:Bone fracture

Article changes
I have made a few minor changes in this article (multi-fragmentary is prefered over comminuted) and expanded the section on description of fractures. I know there is a section on bone healing but surely a brief account of healing is needed in this article to understand the basis of fracture treatment. --Mylesclough 05:25, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Suggested template for Orthopaedic Conditions (see Talk:Orthopedic surgery) is Name Definition Synonyms Incidence Pathogenesis Pathology Stages Classification Natural History/Untreated Prognosis Clinical Features Investigation Non-Operative Treatment Risks of Non-Operative Treatment Prognosis following Non-Operative Treatment Operative Treatment (Note that each operations should have its own wiki entry) Risks of Operative Treatment Prognosis Post Operation Complications Management Prevention History --Mylesclough 05:20, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Bone always Heals in 18 months or less?
I have been reading about broken bones because I recently broke two bones in my left foot. When I was reading the "Bone Response" section in this article, I got the feeling it was implying that bone remodelling shall never take more than 18 months, but I was looking at, and it says, "In the hand, the Remodelling Stage continues for many months to a few years in adults." However, I'm not sure if that website is reliable because I just found it after searching Google for "bone fracture healing". If it is correct, maybe the article ought to have something separate to say about "Bone Response in the Hand."

--JNeal 15:43, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Suggesting a merge with Bone healing
Original tag added March, 2007. Lots of time with no action, so I removed the tag. WLU (talk) 16:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

broken but not fractured?
The article reads, in part, " A broken bone is not always defined as a fracture, much as a fracture is not always defined as a broken bone. (U.S. Gov't 2005) A broken bone is defined as a complete severing of the bone, as in opposition to a fracture covering any type of crack or break in the bone."

These two sentences appear to contradict each other. If "a fracture covers any type of crack or break in the bone", then how can it be that "a broken bone is not always defined as a fracture"?

Also, what does the bit in parentheses mean? Can I answer my own question by simply reading all the material the U.S. Government produced in 2005?


 * I agree. I think the second sentence should stay and the first should go (although we may need to place some sort of reference pointing to the authoritative definition, if we can find it.  I have heard the same facts as mentioned in the second sentence, but I'm no MD. Root4(one) 03:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Maisonneuve fracture
Having suffered one of these fractures (right tibia) in February, I came to WP for info, alas nothing here. Any of the resident experts fancy filling the gap? -- Web H amster  15:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Not an expert, but I haven't done enough content addition in a while. I'll see what pubmed says... WLU (talk) 15:36, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Um... History dates back to 2004... May try expanding.  WLU (talk) 15:59, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Terminology
The first sentence is: "'A bone fracture is a medical condition in which a bone is cracked but not broken.'"

Further into the article simple fractures, multi-fragmentary fractures, and complete fractures are discussed. These all involve a bone that is divided into more than one piece. This contradicts the initial definition of fracture as "cracked but not broken".

Is this contradiction inherent in medical terminology or is it a specific problem with this article?

If the former, our article would be improved if it acknowledged that there is a problem with medical terminology in general.

Wanderer57 (talk) 16:45, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I am not an MD, but rather an EMT, and was taught that a fracture is the correct technical term for any condition in which the bone cracks or breaks, while the term "broken bone" is a pure coloquialism (sp?). Wwelles14 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:30, 26 April 2009 (UTC).

Replaced "contaminated" with "comminuted"
The text in the Orthopedic section described the difference between open and closed fractures, and the difference between simple and comminuted/multifragmentary. Then it compared the prognosis of simple, closed fractures to open, "contaminated" fractures. This looks like a mistake - it sounds like this was meant to be "comminuted". I looked back in the history and indeed it was in the past: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bone_fracture&diff=53009653&oldid=48820671 Since I believe it was mistakenly "corrected" I'm putting it back. Of course, if "comminuted" is an old term (how do we know this?) then perhaps it should be further changed to "multifragmentary". --Weeble (talk) 20:51, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Treatment
I am going to delete the first section on 1st aid as it is inadequate and incorrect. You do NOT splint unless absolutely necessary.Desoto10 (talk) 06:05, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Gruesome Photo
Is there any benefit in featuring a somewhat gory photo of somebody's toe hanging off? I wouldn't have thought so. Andrew WD (talk) 08:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I think injury photos are worthwhile on WP because it helps keep people who are not in first-responder occupations from being too far detached from reality. It is worthwhile because if they are ever at the scene of trauma it won't be the first time they've ever seen a frank injury. Gets the initial shock out of their system ahead of time, rather than having it "when it counts"—when they need to keep a cool head. So it is legitimately educational. — ¾-10 03:51, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Holstein-Lewis fracture-.jpg Deleted
An image used in this article,, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons by Adrignola for the following reason: Mass deletion of copyright violations added by Shabany You can remove the code for this image from the article text (which can look messy), however a different bot may already have done so. You could also try to search for new images to replace the one deleted. If you think the deletion was in error please raise the issue at Commons.
 * What should I do?

This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotification (talk) 23:45, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Open-closed-fracture.jpg Deleted
An image used in this article,, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons by Adrignola for the following reason:  You can remove the code for this image from the article text (which can look messy), however a different bot may already have done so. You could also try to search for new images to replace the one deleted. If you think the deletion was in error please raise the issue at Commons.
 * What should I do?

This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotification (talk) 23:45, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Plain English for "communicate"
Please translate the artful term "communicate" to plain English in the following sentence from the article:

Open (compound) fractures involve wounds that communicate with the fracture, ...

204.210.242.157 (talk) 22:36, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose that Complications of fractures be merged into Bone fracture. I think that the content in the Complications of fractures article can easily be explained in the context of Bone fracture, and the article is of a reasonable size in which the merge will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. TheLongTone (talk) 07:23, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Added the "main" template to that section. I have no problem with this being a subpage but could use some references. -- Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

History of fracture treatment?
I'm surprised there is no "history" section. Have people been expertly setting bones since time immemorial? When was this technique figured out? I've read that in the US Civil War the treatment for most leg injuries was amputation. Setting a bone properly can't be a terribly ancient thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.149.76.50 (talk) 21:30, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Replacing high with low IF reviews
In this edit

A Cochrane review from 2014

Was replaced with a review from "Arch Orthop Trauma Surg" with an impact factor of 1.49

That review states "Current evidence from randomized trials is insufficient to conclude a benefit of PEMF or LIPUS bone growth stimulation in reducing the incidence of nonunions when used for treatment in acute fractures. However, our systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that PEMF or LIPUS can be beneficial in the treatment of acute fractures regarding time to radiological and clinical union. PEMF and LIPUS significantly shorten time to radiological union for acute fractures undergoing non-operative treatment and acute fractures of the upper limb."

Thoughts. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:43, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Text
"Dietary (i.e., not elemental) forms of magnesium, potassium, and fluoride have been identified as factors contributing significantly to bone healing following a fracture, along with dietary copper, zinc, and manganese. Diets lacking these will tend to inhibit bone reconstruction.  Somewhat surprisingly, dietary silicon also appears to be very important for bone healing.  The variety most readily absorbed and bioavailible is orthosilicic acid which is present in simple drinking water, making the drinking of water the most convenient pathway for obtaining this type of silicon.  Other biogenic/phytolithic silica is thought to be available from certain plants, including bamboo. "

Ref does not really support and does not say silicon? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:31, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Proposal for Prevention Section
Hello, we are a group of medical students editing this page as part of our class assignment. We have compiled a list of suggestions to improve this article and would appreciate community feedback before we proceed with these edits. Here one of our suggestions:

We propose creating a Prevention section, and adding the following content into the Bone Fracture#Prevention section:

Both high- and low-force trauma can cause bone fracture injuries. Preventive efforts to reduce motor vehicle crashes, the most common cause of high-force trauma, include reducing distractions while driving.[3] Common distractions are driving under the influence and texting or calling while driving, both of which lead to an approximate 6-fold increase in crashes. Wearing a seatbelt can also reduce the likelihood of injury in a collision.

A common cause of low-force trauma is an at-home fall. When considering preventative efforts, the National Institute of Health (NIH) examines ways to reduce the likelihood of falling, the force of the fall, and bone fragility. To prevent at-home falls they suggest keeping cords out of high-traffic areas where someone could trip, installing handrails and keeping stairways well-lit, and installing an assistive bar near the bathtub in the washroom for support. To reduce the impact of a fall the NIH recommends to try falling straight down on your buttocks or onto your hands. Finally, taking calcium vitamin D supplements can help strengthen your bones.

Alessandro L. Ricci (talk) 18:01, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for sharing this. I adjusted your citations using the cite tool. Thanks for sharing your suggestions. JenOttawa (talk) 02:51, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Proposed merge of List of fracture patterns in bone into Bone fracture
The criteria of WP:PAGEDECIDE seem to support the integration of this list into Bone fracture to provide context and prevent disparities in the coverage of the subject. JBchrch  talk  20:11, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * support seems like it would augment the later article,--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:34, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Support: Seems like a logical merge. Content also would seem to fit fine in a bulleted list with the gallery links as text links. - Wikmoz (talk) 17:09, 10 December 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅ JBchrch   talk  10:28, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Potential graphic content warning
Hey, Could it be possible to get a graphic content warning as we see on other medical articles, please ? The open fracture in true color of an ankle in true color sur is adequate for the article but is quite gruesome compare to the radio and "treated in medical facility" other pictures.

I'm not denying the interest of it, nor the denying it could/should though I'd like to point it isn't present in some other language articles and we just had a kid with a broken arm that happen to understand english stumble upon that after checking the french article.... 5.51.183.7 (talk) 14:27, 30 April 2023 (UTC)