1.Axillary versus Forearm Crutches: A Prospective Cohort Comparing which is Superior for 3-Point Crutch Gait
Yap WMQ ; Hairodin Z ; Kwek EBK
Malaysian Orthopaedic Journal 2021;15(No.2):36-42
Introduction: Two common crutches utilised for
orthopaedic rehabilitation include the axillary crutch and
forearm crutch, with either crutch providing weight transfer
through different mechanisms. This study aims to determine
which crutch is best for patients, with specific reference to
crutch gait and stability.
Materials and methods: This is a level 2 prospective cohort
study, recruiting 20 volunteers between 40 to 80 years old.
Participants underwent 3 stations in 3 point crutch gait:
straight line ambulation of 20m, timed-up-and-go-test, and
computerised dynamic posturography. Participants also
answered a subjective questionnaire on their crutch
preferences.
Results: Axillary crutches demonstrated a faster speed of
ambulation compared to forearm crutches (Axillary crutch
v=0.5m/s, Forearm crutch v=0.44m/s, p=0.002). There was a
lower increase in heart rate post activity for axillary crutches.
For the timed-up-and-go test, completing the circuit with
Axillary crutches was faster (t=63.06, p<0.001) versus the
forearm crutch (t=75.36, p<0.001). For computerised
dynamic posturography, participants recorded lower effort
scores for backward tilts when using axillary crutches
(39.13, p=0.0497) versus forearm crutches (42.03,
p=0.0497). Subjectively, majority of participants felt that
axillary crutches had an easier learning curve and were
superior in the areas of ambulation, balance and stability.
Conclusion: Our study demonstrated that axillary crutches
were superior to forearm crutches for 3-point crutch gait;
axillary crutches had a faster ambulation speed, required less
effort during use, provided superior stability and were the
preferred choice subjectively. This study would be helpful
for clinicians and therapists when prescribing mobility aids
to individuals with impaired gait.
2.Lower Limb Malrotation following Minimally Invasive Plating in Distal Tibia Fractures
Yap WMQ ; Ng JW ; Lee MJJR ; Kwek EBK
Malaysian Orthopaedic Journal 2024;18(No.1):140-149
Introduction: Minimally invasive percutaneous
osteosynthesis (MIPO) plating techniques have
demonstrated good outcomes in the treatment of distal tibia
fractures. Early arthritis and functional impairment may
occur if length and rotation are not restored. This study aims
to determine the incidence and severity of tibia malrotation
following MIPO plating of isolated unilateral distal tibia
fractures, defined as torsional difference of greater than 10°
as compared to the contralateral limb and whether the degree
of malrotation affects functional outcomes scores.
Materials and methods: This was a level 2 prospective
cohort study. All patients with fractures of the distal tibia
who underwent surgical fixation with the exclusion of
patients with polytrauma, neurovascular injuries or preexisting disabilities were recruited. Patients underwent
MIPO plating followed by a post-operative Computed
Tomography (CT) scan of bilateral lower limbs. AOFAS
ankle-hindfoot score was recorded at six months and one
year follow-up.
Results: A total of 24 patients (28 to 83 years old) were
recruited. Nineteen patients obtained CT scans. Nine of the
19 patients (47.3%) had tibia malrotation. The mean tibia
malrotation angle was 10.3° (0° - 45°). The average AOFAS
scores was 82.4 and 84.3 at 6 months and 1 year follow-up.
Degree of CT malrotation was not significantly associated
with AOFAS scores at 6 month (spearman rho -0.386) and 1
year (spearman rho -0.343).
Conclusions: Tibia malrotation following MIPO plating of
distal tibia fractures is common, with an incidence of 47.3%
and an average malrotation angle of 10.3°. The degree of
malrotation does not appear to have significant mid-term
functional impact on the patient.