Comparison of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Open Reduction Internal Fixation versus Closed Reduction for Distal Radius Fractures

Background: Distal radius fractures are common injuries that significantly impact wrist function and quality of life. They can be treated through various methods, including open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) and closed reduction. Understanding the comparative effectiveness of these treatment modalities is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes. Objective: This study aims to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of ORIF versus closed reduction for distal radius fractures. Method: A total of 100 patients with distal radius fractures were enrolled in this prospective study over an 18-month period. Patients were divided into two groups: 50 underwent ORIF, and 50 received closed reduction. Clinical outcomes, including pain, wrist function, range of motion, and grip strength, were assessed, along with radiographic parameters such as alignment, healing time, and bone union quality. Results: The ORIF group demonstrated significantly lower pain scores (VAS 2.4 vs. 3.6), improved DASH scores (15.3 vs. 22.8), and better grip strength (85% vs. 70%) compared to the closed reduction group. Radiographically, the ORIF group showed superior alignment in radial inclination (22° vs. 19°), radial height (11 mm vs. 9 mm), and volar tilt (11° vs. 8°). Conclusion: ORIF significantly outperforms closed reduction in terms of both clinical and radiographic outcomes for distal radius fractures, making it a preferred treatment option for unstable or intra-articular fractures. Further studies are needed to explore long-term implications and patient-reported outcomes.