To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Buddy taping versus closed reduction and casting for the management of Boxer's fracture

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
May 2016

Buddy taping versus closed reduction and casting for the management of Boxer's fracture

Vol: 5| Issue: 5| Number:26| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Fifth metacarpal neck fractures treated with soft wrap/buddy taping compared to reduction and casting: results of a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2016 Jan;136(1):135-42

Contributing Authors:
J van Aaken C Fusetti S Luchina S Brunetti JY Beaulieu A Gayet-Ageron K Hanna AY Shin E Hofmeister

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

68 patients with a fifth metacarpal neck fracture were randomized to two different conservative management options: buddy taping with soft wrapping, or closed reduction and cast immobilization. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical and radiological outcomes between the two treatment options. Follow-up was conducted over 4 months post-injury. No significant differences were observed in ...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue