Talk:Distal radius fracture

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hpot90, Johnkimknights. Peer reviewers: Nrnittur, Alibabamd.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

I
I have been going through the list of orthopaedic conditions listed as stubs and suggesting this template for Orthopaedic Conditions (see Talk:Orthopedic surgery) Name Definition Synonyms Incidence Pathogenesis and predisposing factors 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 operation should have its own wiki entry) Risks of Operative Treatment Prognosis Post Operation Complications Management Prevention History --Mylesclough 06:42, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Why does the word Orthopaedic disappear from my links to the Orthopaedic Trauma Association's calssification system? I think they might like that to be present --Mylesclough 07:17, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

images
this articles seriously needs images with X-rays and anatomic drawings. there is also a word missing in the first sentence --Boris Barowski 22:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

radius missing in opening sentence
Mylesclough removed it 8th oct 2005 (yes 2005) and no one noticed!! there were 42 edits since it's removal, yet it was never fixed.

not sure why this Mylesclough dude removed it, he seemed to removed a few things on the 8th and over the course of the next couple of days, added stuff back. why do this? why delete and make the article unreadable and poor? why wait to add stuff back? people like that should not edit.

i do wonder why no one noticed, as without it, the sentence made absolutely no sense at all! makes you wonder what type of people read this page (and also edit it...)

i have fixed it, but in future, when you edit, please read what you've written... 194.221.133.211 12:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC) <--- disgusted wiki user...

Angulation vs. Tilt
Changing "angulation" to tilt... Angulation is actually in the opposite direction to tilt, reffering to the direction that the sharp point of the angle is pointing... thus volar tilt = dorsal angulation

Assessment
This could be upgraded to B class when a majority of paragraphs are properly sourced. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:59, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Distal radius fracture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050130204453/http://www.ota.org:80/compendium/radius.pdf to http://www.ota.org/compendium/radius.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:27, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Project Medicine ORIF vs. External Fixation
Hi All,

I was planning on expanding on the "Surgery" section (5.5) to include a recent meta-analysis of 16 studies that compared the complication rates between the 2 more common fixation techniques for distal radial fractures: open reduction internal fixation w/ plates (ORIF) vs. external fixation. Johnkimknights (talk) 03:31, 27 October 2017 (UTC)


 * User:Johnkimknights sounds great . Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 20:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Classification/Prognosis Changes
Hello!

I intend to clean up the classification section and give more detail regarding each classification. I also intend to add more pictures of the different classification systems.

I also intend to develop the prognosis section (nonoperative vs operative) as well as add complications following injury and/or treatment.

Hopefully this will help physicians in classifying these fractures as well as inform patients what they can expect regarding their injury.

Thank you!
 * Sure, please make sure you use high quality secondary sources. Best Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 02:51, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Wikiproject Medicine Peer Review
-Alibabamd here. Would just like to make a few recommendations with the article. Overall, it seems like a lot has been added. I've noticed a couple of small things that could use improvement and will list them here:

-"A classic "dinner fork" deformity may be seen in dorsally angulated fractures due to dorsal displacement of the carpus. The reverse deformity may be seen in volarly angulated fractures." might help to define dorsally and volarly beforehand?

-"Distal radius fractures are associated with injury to the carpal interosseous ligaments (predominantly the scapholunate and lunatotriquetral ligaments)" maybe add links to interosseous ligaments

-"a fracture would occurs" "Similarly, ff the hand" typos

-"Investigation of a potential distal radial fracture includes assessment of the angle of the joint surface on lateral X-ray (volar/dorsal tilt), the loss of length of the radius from the collapse of the fracture (radial length), and congruency of the distal radioulnar joint (DRUJ)." sentence too long perhaps?

-In treatment section may be useful to add sources more often after each sentence or two even if from the same source

-Need to add sources to examination, associated injuries, surgery, no surgery, epidemiology, and medical imaging sections. I think this is probably the most important thing. The sources that are there in the article seem to be appropriate ones.

Alibabamd (talk) 12:55, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Hey! Great job with the edits on the article. It is easy to follow, logically organized, and very thorough. Here are my suggestions, as listed by section:

Intro: Most of the epidemiology section has been kind of referenced in the ending of the intro; maybe this section can be moved up closer to the intro/integrated into the last paragraph of the intro?

Signs/Symptoms: Source citations needed for introductory paragraph before “Examination” section and "Examination" section. . Some of the the wording here becomes overly technical. For example, maybe including a brief introductory layperson term prior to the medical word. I totally understand how it is very difficult to make this section clear to a layperson without using specific anatomic terminology, but it becomes difficult to follow because of the level of detail being used, and the length of the sentences. I wonder if there might be some way to shorten your sentences, or summarize some of the information with easier wording, to be more digestible for a general audience?

Mechanism of injury: Just the typo: “Cadaver experiments from the late 1800's found that if the forearm strikes the ground at an angle between 60-90°, a fracture would occurs” (change to “a fracture would occur.”)

Diagnosis: Source citations needed.

Classification: Source citations needed. In terms of organization: would the second paragraph make more sense after the bullet point list of anatomic descriptors?

Treatment : -Source 14 ("Closed reduction of colles fractures: Comparison of manual manipulation and finger-trap traction: a prospective, randomized study") is a primary study and may be inappropriate as a source for this article -Source 16 ( "Redisplaced unstable fractures of the distal radius: a prospective randomised comparison of four methods of treatment") is a primary study and may be inappropriate as a source for this article Nrnittur (talk) 22:15, 15 November 2017 (UTC)