Skip to main content
Top
Published in: MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY 2/2017

01-12-2017 | Original Article

Immediate intensive mobilization compared with immediate conventional mobilization for the impacted osteoporotic conservatively treated proximal humeral fracture: a randomized controlled trial

Authors: S. Carbone, C. Razzano, P. Albino, R. Mezzoprete

Published in: MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY | Special Issue 2/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To select in a 2-year survey of proximal humerus fractures accessing the emergency department, a population of osteoporotic stable impacted fractures and to randomize them into two groups, one with an immediate intensive mobilization program and the other with an immediate conventional mobilization program.

Methods

In emergency department, patients with clinical signs of shoulder girdle fracture were submitted to standard X-ray examination and CT scan. Patients with stable (absence of metaphyseal comminution or fifth fragment) osteoporotic (cortical bone thickness lower than 6 mm) impacted (Is any part of metaphysis or head impacted into the shaft? YES/NO) proximal humerus fractures were selected for randomization in one of the two groups. Group 1: early intensive mobilization; Group 2: early conventional mobilization. Functional and radiographic assessment was recorded at 3, 6 and 12 months of follow-up.

Results

In the considered period, 120 patients were affected by a stable impacted osteoporotic proximal humerus fracture. At the final follow-up, 36 patients in group 1 and 39 patients in group 2 were available for statistical analysis. Functional and radiographic scores were comparable, with a trend of significance in favor of group 2. No fracture in any of the group showed significant loss of reduction respect to 6 months of follow-up. 4 (10%) and 1 (2.5%) patients in groups 1 and 2 were not compliant with the rehabilitation program (p = 0.037).

Conclusions

This randomized controlled trial showed that impacted osteoporotic proximal humerus fractures can be managed non-operatively with an early conventional rehabilitation program composed by 10 sessions of passive motion twice a week, followed by recovery of active range of motion for further 10 sessions thrice a week, while no advantage is given by a more aggressive rehabilitation regimen. Self-assisted exercises should be explained to patients to maximize the effects of the assisted program.

Level of evidence

Level 1, randomized controlled double-blinded trial.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Palvanen M, Kannus P, Niemi S, Parkkari J (2006) Update in the epidemiology of proximal humeral fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 442:87–92CrossRefPubMed Palvanen M, Kannus P, Niemi S, Parkkari J (2006) Update in the epidemiology of proximal humeral fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 442:87–92CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Rangan A, Handoll H, Brealey S, Jefferson L, PROFHER Trial Collaborators et al (2015) Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment of adults with displaced fractures of the proximal humerus the PROFHER randomized clinical trial. JAMA 313:1037–1047. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.1629 CrossRefPubMed Rangan A, Handoll H, Brealey S, Jefferson L, PROFHER Trial Collaborators et al (2015) Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment of adults with displaced fractures of the proximal humerus the PROFHER randomized clinical trial. JAMA 313:1037–1047. doi:10.​1001/​jama.​2015.​1629 CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Court-Brown CM, Garg A, McQueen MM (2001) The epidemiology of proximal humeral fractures. Acta Orthop Scand 72:365–371CrossRefPubMed Court-Brown CM, Garg A, McQueen MM (2001) The epidemiology of proximal humeral fractures. Acta Orthop Scand 72:365–371CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Fjalestad T, Stromsoe K, Blucher J, Tennoe B (2005) Fractures in the proximal humerus: functional outcome and evaluation of 70 patients treated in hospital. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 125:310–316CrossRefPubMed Fjalestad T, Stromsoe K, Blucher J, Tennoe B (2005) Fractures in the proximal humerus: functional outcome and evaluation of 70 patients treated in hospital. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 125:310–316CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Rasmussen S, Hvass I, Dalsgaard J, Christensen S, Holstad E (1992) Displaced proximal humeral fractures: results of conservative treatment. Injury 23:41–43CrossRefPubMed Rasmussen S, Hvass I, Dalsgaard J, Christensen S, Holstad E (1992) Displaced proximal humeral fractures: results of conservative treatment. Injury 23:41–43CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Lefevre-Colau MM, Babinet A, Fayad F, Fermanian J, Anract P, Roren A, Kansao J, Revel M, Poiraudeau S (2007) Immediate mobilization compared with conventional immobilization for the impacted nonoperatively treated proximal humeral fracture. A randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:2582–2590CrossRefPubMed Lefevre-Colau MM, Babinet A, Fayad F, Fermanian J, Anract P, Roren A, Kansao J, Revel M, Poiraudeau S (2007) Immediate mobilization compared with conventional immobilization for the impacted nonoperatively treated proximal humeral fracture. A randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:2582–2590CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Russo R, Cautiero F, Della Rotonda G (2012) The classification of complex 4-part humeral fractures revisited: the missing fifth fragment and indications for surgery. Musculoskelet Surg 96 Suppl 1:S13–S19. doi:10.1007/s12306-012-0195-2 CrossRefPubMed Russo R, Cautiero F, Della Rotonda G (2012) The classification of complex 4-part humeral fractures revisited: the missing fifth fragment and indications for surgery. Musculoskelet Surg 96 Suppl 1:S13–S19. doi:10.​1007/​s12306-012-0195-2 CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Constant CR, Murley AHG (1987) A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res 214:160–164 Constant CR, Murley AHG (1987) A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res 214:160–164
12.
go back to reference Gerber C, Fuchs B, Hodler J (2000) The results of repair of massive tears of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82:505CrossRefPubMed Gerber C, Fuchs B, Hodler J (2000) The results of repair of massive tears of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82:505CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Hodgson SA, Mawson SJ, Stanley D (2003) Rehabilitation after two-part fractures of the neck of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85:419–422CrossRefPubMed Hodgson SA, Mawson SJ, Stanley D (2003) Rehabilitation after two-part fractures of the neck of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85:419–422CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Court-Brown CM, Cattermole H, McQueen MM (2002) Impacted valgus fractures (B1.1) of the proximal humerus. The results of non-operative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84:504–508CrossRefPubMed Court-Brown CM, Cattermole H, McQueen MM (2002) Impacted valgus fractures (B1.1) of the proximal humerus. The results of non-operative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84:504–508CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Immediate intensive mobilization compared with immediate conventional mobilization for the impacted osteoporotic conservatively treated proximal humeral fracture: a randomized controlled trial
Authors
S. Carbone
C. Razzano
P. Albino
R. Mezzoprete
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
Springer Milan
Published in
MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY / Issue Special Issue 2/2017
Print ISSN: 2035-5106
Electronic ISSN: 2035-5114
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-017-0483-y

Other articles of this Special Issue 2/2017

MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY 2/2017 Go to the issue