Rius-Zavala MM, Orellana-Reta CA, Fuentes-Figueroa S, Nieva-López MG

Language: Spanish
References: 10
Page: 287-291
PDF size: 166.14 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To establish whether complications in treatment, readmissions and reinterventions are related to psychological disturbances. To determine if the type, age and time of use are related to psychological aspects. Material and methods: Retrospective, observational and transversal study in patients treated with external fixator in the period from 2005 to 2010. We used clinical records, χ² statistical tests and Student’s t-test with the IBM SPSS Statistics program, version 24. Results: Circular fixator: we observed a significant p of 0.024 in the relations between age and psychological alterations. Regarding the complications and the psychological alterations, we obtained a significant p 0.048. Monoplanar fixator: the difference was significant of 0.038 on the relation between readmissions and psychological alterations. Discussion: There are psychological disturbances in patients and families that may interfere with the treatment and complications. The literature showed that if there are alterations in the initial questionnaire, they will remain equal and generate increased aggressiveness; if there were no initial alterations, there will be no changes. We observed less psychological effects in older patients (13-16 years) and greater anxiety in patients in the medium range (10-12 years), as well as in patients with residual deformities. Conclusions: The psychological intervention is important in the pre-, trans- and postsurgical time. Patients of medium age, which corresponds to preteens, presented more psychological disturbances; therefore, it is recommended to avoid the use of external fixators in this age range.

REFERENCES

1. Büyükyilmaz F, Sendir M, Salmond S: Evaluation of body image and self-esteem in patients with external fixation devices: a Turkish perspective. Orthop Nurs. 2009; 28(4): 169-75.

2. Richard HM, Nguyen DC, Birch JG, Roland SD, Samchukov MK, Cherkashin AM: Clinical implications of psychosocial factors on pediatric external fixation treatment and recommendations. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; 473(10): 3154-62.

3. Camacho-Franco L, Cassis-Zacarías N, Harfusch-Naser A: Alargamiento femoral con fijador externo uniplanar en pacientes pediátricos. Acta Ortop Mex. 2011; 25(5): 294-6.

4. Ramaker RR, Lagro SW, van Roermund PM, Sinnema G: The psychological and social functioning of 14 children and 12 adolescents after Ilizarov leg lengthening. Acta Orthop Scand. 2000; 71(1): 55-9.

5. Montpetit K, Hamdy RC, Dahan-Oliel N, Zhang X, Narayanan UG: Measurement of health-related quality of life in children undergoing external fixator treatment for lower limb deformities. J Pediatr Orthop. 2009; 29(8): 920-6.

6. Vitale MA, Choe JC, Sesko AM, Hyman JE, Lee FY, Roye DP Jr, et al: The effect of limb length discrepancy on health-related quality of life: is the ‘2 cm rule’ appropriate? J Pediatr Orthop B. 2006; 15(1): 1-5.

7. Niemela BJ, Tjernstrom B: Mended but not healed —somatic and mental health 10 years after leg lengthening with Ilizarov. J Depress Anxiety. 2014; 3(2): 151.

8. American Psychiatric Association: Manual diagnóstico y estadístico de los trastornos mentales: DSM-5. España: Editorial Médica Panamericana; 2014.

9. Stein DJ, Hollander E: Tratado de los trastornos de ansiedad. Barcelona, España: Psiquiatría Editores S.L; 2004: 440-1.

10. Niemelä BJ, Tjernström B, Andersson G, Wahlsten VS: Does leg lengthening pose a threat to a child’s mental health?: An interim report one year after surgery. J Pediatr Orthop. 2007; 27(6): 611-7.