Journal
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME
Volume 90A, Issue -, Pages 62-67Publisher
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.G.01556
Keywords
-
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Although there are numerous methods for defining fracture-healing in clinical studies, no consensus exists regarding the most valid and reliable manner for assessing union or for determining which outcomes are most important. This article summarizes and describes methods for the clinical assessment of fracture-healing and reports results from a systematic review of prevalent definitions currently used in published clinical studies. Conventional radiography and ad hoc clinical definitions continue to be the most commonly used means of assessing fracture-healing in clinical studies. Investigators must improve upon and apply more rigorous outcome assessment in clinical trials, emphasize patient-important outcomes, and report factors that may bias estimated effects.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available