# Comparison of Short-Arm Immobilization and Long-Arm Immobilization in Conservatively Managed Distal Radius Fractures: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

**Authors:** Yash P Chaudhry, Genoveffa R Morway, Efstratios A Papadelis, Nikki A Doerr, Kenneth W Graf, Rakesh P Mashru, Henry J Dolch

PMC · DOI: 10.7759/cureus.55813 · Cureus · 2024-03-08

## TL;DR

This study compares two immobilization methods for wrist fractures and finds no significant difference in outcomes between them.

## Contribution

The study provides evidence that short-arm immobilization is as effective as long-arm immobilization for wrist fractures.

## Key findings

- No significant differences in radiographic outcomes between short-arm and long-arm immobilization.
- Short-arm immobilization is a safe option for conservative treatment of wrist fractures.
- Functional outcomes and need for surgery were similar in both immobilization methods.

## Abstract

Distal radius fractures are often treated conservatively with immobilization. Immobilizing above the elbow limits forearm rotation, though recent literature has suggested the effects on radiographic or functional outcomes may be negligible. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to analyze the radiographic and functional outcome scores of distal radius fractures managed with short-arm (SA) immobilization and long-arm (LA) immobilization. An electronic systematic search was performed of the PubMed and EMBASE databases from inception to October 5, 2022. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with acute distal radius fractures undergoing nonoperative treatment (involving application/maintenance of immobilization) comparing above-elbow versus below-elbow constructs were included. The outcomes of interest were changes in radiographic parameters (loss of volar tilt [VT], radial height [RH], and radial inclination [RI]), loss of reduction, requirement for surgery, and patient-reported functional outcomes (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, or Hand [DASH] or Quick DASH survey). The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 was used for study quality assessment. The effect size of the interventions was assessed using random effect models to calculate mean differences (MDs) for continuous variables and odds ratios (ORs) for categorical variables. Standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated for patient-reported functional outcome scores. Nine studies involving 983 cases were included, including 497 SA and 486 LA. No statistically significant differences were observed with regards to VT (P = 0.83), RH (P = 0.81), RI (P = 0.35), loss of reduction (P = 0.33), requirement for surgery (P = 0.33), or patient-reported functional outcomes (P = 0.10). There was no difference in radiographic outcomes, need for surgery, or functional scores among patients treated with SA and LA immobilization. Utilizing SA immobilization is a safe option for conservative management of distal radius fractures and the benefits of mitigating complications associated with LA immobilization may supersede the theoretical limited forearm rotational stability observed with SA immobilization. Further study is required to determine the optimal method of SA immobilization.

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** RI (MESH:C564256), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, or Hand (MESH:D012019), Distal Radius Fractures (MESH:D000092503)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC10999297/full.md

## Figures

8 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC10999297/full.md

## References

28 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC10999297/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC10999297