Skip to main content

Official Journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology

Table 1 Demographics of patients with distal radius fractures treated with either the standard volar approach or the pronator quadratus-sparing approach

From: Does the pronator-sparing approach improve functional outcome, compared to a standard volar approach, in volar plating of distal radius fractures? A prospective, randomized controlled trial

Characteristic

Standard approach

PQ-sparing approach

p value

Number of patients, n

48

43

–

Mean age, years (range)

50 (21–75)

50 (21–75)

0.851

Women:men, n (%)

39 (81):9 (19)

37 (86):6 (14)

0.538

Fracture of dominant side, n (%)

28 (58):20 (42)

26 (60):17 (40)

0.836

Extension:flexion injury, n (%)

42 (88):6 (12)

37 (88):5 (12)

0.931

I° open:closed fracture, n (%)

3 (6):45 (94)

1 (2):42 (98)

0.362

AO classification

 A2, n (%)

2 (4.2)

0 (0)

0.498

 A3, n (%)

7 (14.6)

4 (9.3)

 B1, n (%)

1 (2.1)

1 (2.3)

 B3, n (%)

1 (2.1)

3 (7.0)

 C1, n (%)

4 (8.3)

4 (9.3)

 C2, n (%)

17 (35.4)

21 (48.8)

 C3, n (%)

16 (33.3)

10 (23.3)

  1. AO Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen, PQ pronator quadratus