Treatment Outcomes for Distal Radius Fractures

BACKGROUND: Distal radius fractures (DRFs) are among the most prevalent in upper-extremity injuries, particularly in older adults and individuals with osteoporosis. The common treatment options include surgical interventions such as volar locking plate (VLP) fixation and percutaneous pinning, as well as conservative strategies like splinting and bracing. However, the comparative effectiveness of these modalities remains unclear. This study aims to compare the functional outcomes and complication rates associated with VLP, percutaneous pinning, bracing, and splinting in the treatment of DRFs. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library (September 2001-February 2025) identified randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, and retrospective cohort studies comparing DRF treatments. Functional outcomes and complication rates (superficial infection, malunion, nonunion, delayed union) were analyzed. Data were analyzed using Review Manager Web with significance set at p ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies involving 3,200 patients met inclusion criteria: VLP fixation (n = 896), percutaneous pinning (n = 666), splinting (n = 718), and bracing (n = 903). No significant differences were observed between VLP and splinting or between bracing and splinting for Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH); Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE); or grip strength. Compared with VLP, percutaneous pinning demonstrated better PRWE scores but a higher infection rate. Compared with bracing, percutaneous pinning showed significantly better DASH, PRWE, and grip strength outcomes, although with substantial heterogeneity. Compared with bracing, VLP fixation yielded significantly better DASH, PRWE, and grip strength outcomes and a lower malunion rate. CONCLUSION: All 4 treatments achieved acceptable outcomes, but with key trade-offs: Percutaneous Pinning had the best functional results but a higher infection risk. VLP provided better function and lower malunion rates than bracing. Splinting and bracing were effective conservative options, often yielding results similar to VLP, but were inferior in some specific measures. The findings suggest that a perfect anatomic repair is not always necessary for a good recovery. Ultimately, the choice of treatment must be individualized, weighing the functional benefits against the risks of complications, while considering patient health factors and preferences. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
JBJS Reviews
Published
2026-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.rvw.25.00254
Primary Topic
Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Treatment Outcomes for Distal Radius Fractures

Martin Skie, Ki Woong Yoon
JBJS Reviews
Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
article

Treatment Outcomes for Distal Radius Fractures

Martin Skie, Ki Woong Yoon
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Distal radius fractures (DRFs) are among the most prevalent in upper-extremity injuries, particularly in older adults and individuals with osteoporosis. The common treatment options include surgical interventions such as volar locking plate (VLP) fixation and percutaneous pinning, as well as conservative strategies like splinting and bracing. However, the comparative effectiveness of these modalities remains unclear. This study aims to compare the functional outcomes and complication rates associated with VLP, percutaneous pinning, bracing, and splinting in the treatment of DRFs. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library (September 2001-February 2025) identified randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, and retrospective cohort studies comparing DRF treatments. Functional outcomes and complication rates (superficial infection, malunion, nonunion, delayed union) were analyzed. Data were analyzed using Review Manager Web with significance set at p ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies involving 3,200 patients met inclusion criteria: VLP fixation (n = 896), percutaneous pinning (n = 666), splinting (n = 718), and bracing (n = 903). No significant differences were observed between VLP and splinting or between bracing and splinting for Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH); Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE); or grip strength. Compared with VLP, percutaneous pinning demonstrated better PRWE scores but a higher infection rate. Compared with bracing, percutaneous pinning showed significantly better DASH, PRWE, and grip strength outcomes, although with substantial heterogeneity. Compared with bracing, VLP fixation yielded significantly better DASH, PRWE, and grip strength outcomes and a lower malunion rate. CONCLUSION: All 4 treatments achieved acceptable outcomes, but with key trade-offs: Percutaneous Pinning had the best functional results but a higher infection risk. VLP provided better function and lower malunion rates than bracing. Splinting and bracing were effective conservative options, often yielding results similar to VLP, but were inferior in some specific measures. The findings suggest that a perfect anatomic repair is not always necessary for a good recovery. Ultimately, the choice of treatment must be individualized, weighing the functional benefits against the risks of complications, while considering patient health factors and preferences. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

JBJS ReviewsVol. 14(4)
University of Toledo Medical Center (US), University of Toledo (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.