Abstract
Hip fractures are a major challenge and impose high demand on orthopaedic services.
DHS has been proved to be a gold standard method of treatment in uncomplicated extracapsular fractures. The introduction of Intramedullary devices has provided us with a wider choice of construct. Since there was conflicting literature evidence comparing the outcomes of DHS and IMHS, we set out to analyse the same in our practice.
Forty patients in each group operated in the year 2000, comparable in fracture pattern, age and sex distribution were studied. The operating time, fluoroscopic exposure, blood loss, complications (Intra-op, Post-op and Deaths), duration of hospital stay and the discharge destinations were studied from the clinical notes and Hospital information system. Statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS for all the available data.
Statistically, the DHS has a lesser duration of surgery, lower fluoroscopic exposure and lesser duration of hospital stay. However, clinically it appears that the IMHS is fraught with more complications.
Correspondence should be addressed to Ms Larissa Welti, Scientific Secretary, EFORT Central Office, Technoparkstrasse 1, CH-8005 Zürich, Switzerland
