Abstract
Objectives:
Supracondylar humeral fractures (SCHF) are the most common elbow injury in the pediatric population. The treatment, outcome, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) following these injuries are described.
Methods:
Patients with SCHF who were treated depending on the fracture type were evaluated. Medical records stored in the REDCap database were reviewed to obtain information on demographics, mechanisms of injury, neurovascular status, infection rates, and postoperative complications. Outcomes were assessed using Flynn's criteria and Pediatric Quality of Life (PedsQL) version 4.0. Follow-up was for 6 months.
Results:
A total of 101 patients with a mean age of 5.2 years (SD ± 2.3) were seen. Most of the injuries occurred at home (64.3%). The left-arm (nondominant) was the most injured (62%), though 92% of patients were right hand dominant. Ninety-six percent of the fractures were the extension type. A total of 98% had satisfactory outcomes using Flynn's criteria and older patients were likely to sustain Gartland type III SCHF (P = .01). There was a significant difference in mean scores of PedsQL (all P values < .01) at 6 months.
Conclusions:
In this prospective study, the quality of life of patients following SCHF diminished at the time of the injury and returned to the population normal 6 months after. There was no significant difference in HRQoL scores between patients who presented early and those who presented late. The delayed presentation and management did not also affect the functional outcome and complications. Therefore, surgical management of these injuries after late presentation is still safe.
Keywords: Flynn criteria, Ghana, outcome, PedsQL, supracondylar humeral fracture
1. Introduction
Supracondylar humeral fractures (SCHF) are the most common pediatric elbow fractures.[1–3] The reported incidence is between 50% and 70% of elbow fractures[4] and about 13% of all pediatric fractures.[5] The peak incidence is between the ages of 5 to 7 years with a male-to-female ratio of 2:1.[6,7] Some authors, however, have found no variations among the sexes whereas others found higher incidence among girls.[7,8] The left hand (which usually is the nondominant hand) is mostly affected in most studies.[7–9] These fractures are classified using the Gartland classification, which also serves as a treatment guide.[10] Gartland types 1 and IIa fractures may be managed nonoperatively whereas types IIb and III are treated operatively.[11–13] Closed reduction and percutaneous (CRPP) fixation using Kirschner wires (K-wires) is the operative treatment of choice.[5,14]
Some studies that have evaluated outcomes and complications with respect to timing found no difference in the infection rate, neurovascular injury, length of hospital stay, or conversion to open reduction.[15–18] Others, however, recommended urgent fixation as any delays made the subsequent surgery difficult and raised the chances of complications.[19,20] In Ghana and most of the subregion, aside from patients with SCHF presenting late, others are taking to traditional bonesetters for management leading to permanent disability, and life and limb-threatening complications. This is as a result of what we term “bonesetter's limb or gangrene.”[21]
This study sought to evaluate the treatment and outcomes as well as quality of life in children who presented to our emergency unit with SCHF.
2. Patients and methods
This was a prospective cohort study done at the orthopedic unit of Korle Bu Teaching hospital (with a bed capacity of over 2000) from January 2014 to January 2015. The follow-up was for 6 months. The study was approved by the institutional review board of the University of Ghana Medical School (PIN MS-Et/M.2-P3.1/2014–2015).
2.1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria
The inclusion criteria for this study were children up to the age of 13 years. Children who had SCHF that were over 3 weeks old were excluded.
2.2. Study procedure
Patients with Gartland type I (Fig. 1) fractures did not need any form of manipulation, whereas those with type IIa fractures had manipulation under anesthesia. The limb was then put in a well-padded long-arm splint with 60° to 70° of elbow flexion for 3 weeks. X-rays were obtained weekly to ensure the fracture remains reduced. The higher energy types are usually associated with gross deformity of the elbow (Fig. 2A and B). All cases of Gartland type IIb and type III (Figs. 3 and 4 respectively) were done using CRPP with the aid of an image intensifier. The limb was then splinted for 3 weeks after which time the k-wires were removed. The cross-pinning technique was mostly used for this study (Fig. 5). None of these injuries needed open reduction and pinning and none of those managed nonsurgically redislocated.
Figure 1.

Lateral x-ray of a patient with Gartland type I supracondylar humeral fracture (SCHF). This fracture may be difficult to see on plain radiograph. The presence of an anterior and/or posterior fact pad sign (blue arrow) on the lateral view indicates the likelihood of a type I fracture.
Figure 2.

(A, B) Clinical appearance of type III supracondylar fracture in a 6-year-old boy. The AP and lateral views show an S-shaped deformity of the elbow due to complete displacement of the distal fragment.
Figure 3.

AP and lateral views of a 4-year-old boy with type II SCHF. The AP view shows a fracture line through the metaphyseal region of the distal humerus on either side of the olecranon fossa. Lateral view shows posterior angulation of the distal fragment associated with an intact posterior cortex and periosteal hinge.
Figure 4.

Lateral and AP views of a 5-year-old girl showing completely displaced Gartland type III fracture.
Figure 5.

Postoperative AP and lateral x-rays showing reduction and cross-pinning of the fracture.
The range of motion and carrying angle and PedsQL were the outcome instrument used in this study. These were administered by one of our senior Orthopedic surgeons at 3 weeks and final follow up at 6 months.
2.3. Data handling and statistics
Study data were collected and stored in REDCap electronic data capture tools hosted at University of California, San Francisco.[22,23] Statistical analyses were done using SAS version 9.4 Software (SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC, 2004). Continuous variables were reported as means and standard deviations while categorical variables were reported as percentages. Chi-square and Fisher exact tests were used to test for relationships between categorical variables such as time of injury to the time of presentation to hospital, marital status of parents, and time of presentation to the hospital and educational levels of parents and time of presentation to the hospital.
Flynn's criteria grouped as satisfactory (excellent and good) and unsatisfactory (fair and poor) were used for evaluating the physical outcomes of management. Measurement of the health-related quality-of-life scores using the pediatric quality-of-life assessment form was done at 3 weeks and 6 months posttreatment respectively using a paired sample t test.
3. Results
A total of 101 patients with SCHF were seen within the study period, of which 56 had closed reduction and percutaneous pinning. The mean age was 5.2 years (SD ± 2.3) and the highest incidence was between 5 and 7 years. Of the number, 31.7% (32/101) were Gartland type I, 24.7% (25/101) type II, and 43.6% (44/101) type III fractures. Of the type II fractures, 13 were IIa and 12 being type IIb. In all, 56 patients were managed using CRPP. The left elbow was the most injured (62.4%) though 92.1% of the patients were right hand dominant. Ninety-six percent had an extension type of supracondylar fracture as a result of a fall on the outstretched hand. A total of 70.4% of the patients were seen within 24 hours of the injury (Table 1). Of the 29.6% that presented after 24 hours, 55.6% were initially sent to traditional bonesetters, 14.8% downplayed the injury severity, 11.1% were transferred from another health facility, and 3.7% could not get a means of transportation to the hospital. Only 33 patients were managed within the first 24 hours of injury and these were mainly types I and IIa. About 56.4% of the patients were treated after 3 days. This delay was due mainly to factors such as unavailability of theater, waiting for C-arm which may not be functioning or waiting for the patient to pay for the cost of surgery. Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of patients as well as Gartland type, time from injury to admission, and time from injury to definitive management.
Table 1.
Characteristics of patients
| Characteristic | Frequency | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||
| Male | 73 | 72.3 |
| Female | 28 | 27.7 |
| Age | ||
| Less than 5 years | 58 | 57.4 |
| More than 5 years | 43 | 42.6 |
| Mode of transport | ||
| Public: (taxi, trotro) | 65 | 64.4 |
| Private cars | 27 | 26.7 |
| Walk-in | 8 | 7.9 |
| Ambulance | 1 | 1.0 |
| Location where the injury occurred | ||
| Home | 65 | 64.4 |
| School | 28 | 27.7 |
| Recreational area | 8 | 7.9 |
| Time injury occurred | 66 | 65.3 |
| Day (morning and afternoon) | ||
| Night (evening and night) | 35 | 34.7 |
| Injury to admission | ||
| Less than 24 hours | 71 | 70.3 |
| 24 hours to 72 hours | 12 | 1.9 |
| 4 days to 14 days. | 18 | 17.8 |
| Injury to theatre | ||
| Less than 24 hours | 33 | 32.7 |
| 24 hours to 72 hours | 11 | 10.9 |
| 4 days to 14 days | 57 | 56.4 |
Cumulatively 98% of patients had satisfactory outcomes. The 2% with poor outcomes had a loss of range of motion between 10° and 20° and carrying angle between 10° and 15°. A patient had cubitus varus of 5°, which did not require reoperation at follow-up. Of the type III fractures (44/100), 42 as well as all the types I and II SCHF had satisfactory outcomes.
There was a significant association between patients’ age and Gartland type (X2 (2, N = 101) = 8.76, P = .01). There were however no association between gender and Gartland type X2 (2, N = 101) = 2.69, P = .26). There was also no significant association (P > .05) between variables such as age, distance traveled, time of day, type (extension vs. flexion), injury to admission, and Gartland type with functional and cosmetic outcomes.
Children who were admitted for SCHF suffered significant decline in physical, emotional, school and social well-being during the first 3 weeks after the injury; they however recovered by 6 months postinjury (all P < .01). Table 2 shows the results from the paired sample t test of the PedsQL mean scores at 3 weeks and 6 months posttreatment. The observed complications from the study are shown in Table 3.
Table 2.
Descriptive statistics and t test for PedsQL at 3 weeks and 6 months following the injury
| 3-weeks | 6-months | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Pediatric quality of life | M | SD | M | SD | N | 95% CI for mean difference | t | df |
| Physical | 1.10 | 0.50 | 0.0 | 0.10 | 101 | 0.46, 0.61 | 20.98∗ | 100 |
| Emotional | 0.20 | 0.40 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 101 | 0.35, 0.47 | 4.45∗ | 100 |
| Social | 0.20 | 0.40 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 101 | 0.36, 0.47 | 6.13∗ | 100 |
| School | 1.10 | 0.80 | 0.0 | 0.10 | 101 | 0.67, 0.88 | 14.89∗ | 100 |
P < .01.
Table 3.
Complications observed during the study period
| Complication | Frequency |
|---|---|
| Pin site infection | 5/66 |
| Gartland type II | 2 |
| Gartland type III | 3 |
| Nerve injury | 3/101 |
| AIN | 2 |
| Ulna nerve | 1 |
| Vascular injury | 1 |
| Cubitus varus | 1 |
| Myositis ossificans | 1 |
AIN, anterior interosseous nerve.
4. Discussion
Supracondylar humeral fractures of the distal humerus are the commonest fracture around the pediatric elbow.[24] And despite this and the numerous studies on this topic, only a few relate these injuries with outcomes and health-related quality of life.[25] This study found a satisfactory outcome of 98% using Flynn's criteria in the patients seen over the 6 months. Though Gartland III fractures are caused by high-energy trauma and are generally inherently unstable and for which reason one expects a poor outcome, 95.5% of the patients in this study had satisfactory outcome. This confirms the assertion that the outcomes are excellent once they are managed aggressively by surgical fixation.[26] Though benign and with satisfactory outcomes, the long-term complications of type I fractures such as the mean range of elbow extension compared with the uninjured elbow, however, may be as high as 30%.[26]
The type II fractures in our series, whether managed surgically or nonsurgically, all resulted in satisfactory outcomes. This was because we applied the right treatment protocols depending on the fracture type (manipulation and splinting for type IIa and CRPP for type IIb). Miranda et al[27] made the same observations as they reported similar radiological and functional outcomes when closed reduction followed by casting was compared to CRPP of type II fractures. Again, 77% of type II fractures in the series by Hadlow et al[28] would have had unnecessary surgery if all of these fractures were surgically treated. Using Flynn's criteria, Parikh et al[11] reported a satisfactory outcome (72%) in nonsurgically treated type II fractures, with only 8% (n = 2/25) reporting unsatisfactory outcomes. Moraleda et al[29] also reported a good outcome (80.4%) in a series of 46 patients managed nonsurgically for type II fractures with a mean follow-up of 6.6 years. Notwithstanding the ongoing discussion, there is an increasing tendency toward surgical fixation of these fractures.[26] It is believed that type II fractures are a heterogeneous group with varying degrees of stability and angulation of the anterior cortex.[26] For this reason, they have been subclassified into types IIa and IIb depending on rotation and/or displacement in the coronal plane[30] and type IIb fractures should be managed surgically while type IIa may be managed by closed reduction and immobilization.[31]
Though there are many studies on SCHF due to its common nature, only a few have used validated outcomes measures.[25,32–34] Available studies mainly looked at patients with lower extremity injury outcomes after treatment.[35,36] In this study, which is among the first from Africa to look at the effect of SCHF on the quality of life in children, the PedsQL version 4.0 was used.[37] This tool assesses: physical, emotional, social, and school functioning as the key features of quality of life.[35] The reliability and internal consistency, as well as construct validity, have been shown to be good.[35] Our results suggests that all the components of the PedsQL were affected by the injury initially but improved to near the population normal at 6 months’ follow-up. This may be explained by the fact that it took about 3 to 4 weeks for the fracture to heal clinically and subsequent use of the affected limb with full return to activities of daily living.
The average age of 5.2 years from this study confirms results from previous studies.[38] According to Michelson et al,[39] by ages 5 to 6 years, most children would have enrolled into schools compared with those younger than this age. This age is also associated with increased activity levels, minimal supervision by parents, increased playground activity both at school and home, all of which increases the risk of sustaining fractures.[40,41] They also learn new skills and the tendency to experiment with the acquired skills further increases the risk of fractures and this may explain the peak incidence at 5 to 6 years.[39] The role of home environment cannot be over-emphasized as 65% of the SCHF in our study occurred at home and this is similar to that found by Mangwani et al.[42] This however differs from other studies that found only a small fraction that occurred at home.[6,7] This may be because most of the patients from this study were restricted to play at home mostly because of safety reasons or lack of availability of sports facilities in the areas. Of these fractures, 65.4% occurred during the daytime, which unsurprisingly coincides with the period of maximum activity, and less supervision as the parents may not be home or the child may be in school.
Our results indicated that SCHF are common in males (72%) and this may be due to the active nature of boys in this age group. Though a slight female predominance has been suggested by some studies,[7,8] most authors found higher incidence (ranging from 53% to 64%) in males than females.[6,7,42,43] Although only about 8% to 15% of the world population is left hand dominant,[8] most of the fractures (62%) in our study population occurred in the left elbow, though 92% were right hand dominant. It has been found that during a fall on the outstretched hand, the commonest mechanism of injury, it is the nondominant hand that hits the ground first as the person tries to break the fall, accounting for this observation.[8] It was observed that the older children were most likely to sustain type III injuries. In the pediatric population, bone mineral density and content increases with age[44,45] hence greater force is needed to cause a fracture compared to younger children.[38]
Of the 101 patients with SCHF, there were 3 documented neurological deficits (Table 3). The ulnar nerve injury was iatrogenic following medial pin placement. The overall incidence of neurological complications (2.97%) was lower than that reported by other authors.[8,42,46,47] The nerve injuries however resolved within 3 months which is consistent with the findings from other studies.[48] The 9.3% infection rate in this study was within the estimated rates of 0% to 21% reported following surgical management of SCHF,[19,49] and these resolved following removal of the pins and administration of antibiotics. Noted by the current authors and not reported previously is that the 5 patients that had the infections were initially seen and treated by traditional healers. Further studies are therefore required to determine the association between herbal treatment and pin site infections.
In this study, we fixed the fractures with 2 crossed pins. The crossing of pins at the fracture site may be associated with secondary displacement of the fracture and this might have accounted for the single incidence of cubitus varus seen. This was not serious enough to warrant surgical correction. Research has shown that cross pinning provides much stability compared with lateral or parallel pinning thereby reducing the incidence of cubitus varus which may result from displacement of the distal fragment or posttreatment loss of reduction.[50,51] There was a single case of vascular injury that resolved after CRPP as well as a case of myositis ossificans, which resolved within a year of the injury. There were however no cases of compartment syndrome or Volkmann ischemic contractures, same as reported by other authors.[52]
Our study shows that, distance traveled to get to the hospital, time of day patient presented, time from injury to admission or to surgery (all of which led to delay in fracture fixation) did not have any significant effect on the PedsQL or the functional and cosmetic outcomes. It was observed that patients treated within 24 hours and after 24 hours did not differ in terms of outcome or complication rate. Some other authors made similar observations to ours.[53] We believe that delayed management of SCHF, without neurological or vascular complications, is safe as it enables the patient to get the optimum perioperative care. And the outcomes appear to be similar to those treated earlier.[53] To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study from sub-Saharan Africa to find out the effect of these fractures, on both PedsQL and functional outcomes simultaneously. This study was limited by the small sample size and the fact that it was conducted in a single institution; hence, the findings cannot be generalized. A multicenter or nationwide study therefore is recommended to find out if our findings were due to chance or consistent with other centers. This however enabled us to gather all the important data on each patient as well as follow up on all of them and this together with the prospective nature were the strength of this study.
5. Conclusion
In this prospective study, the quality of life of patients following SCHF diminished at the time of the injury and returned to the population normal 6 months after. There was no significant difference in HRQoL scores between patients who presented early and those who presented late. The delayed presentation and management did not also affect the functional outcome and complications. Therefore, in a lower or lower middle income country such as Ghana, surgical management of these injuries after late presentation is still safe.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to Ms. Velarie Ansu of the School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana and the late Prof. Jacob Plange-Rhule for their immense contribution in terms of suggestions and editing thus making the work possible.
References
- 1.Dimeglio A. Growth in pediatric orthopaedics. J Pediatr Orthop. 2001;21:549–555. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Cheng JC, Ng BK, Ying SY, et al. A 10-year study of the changes in the pattern and treatment of 6 493 fractures. J Pediatr Orthop. 1999;19:344–350. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Otsuka NY, Kasser JR. Supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 1997;5:19–26. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Wilson MJ, Hunter JB. Supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children—wire removal in the outpatient setting. Injury Extra. 2006;37:313–315. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Omid R, Choi PD, Skaggs DL. Supracondylar humeral fractures in children. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:1121–1132. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Cheng JC, Lam TP, Maffulli N. Epidemiological features of supracondylar fractures of the humerus in Chinese children. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2001;10:63–67. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Farnsworth CL, Silva PD, Mubarak SJ. Etiology of supracondylar humerus fractures. J Pediatr Orthop. 1998;18:38–42. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Houshian S, Mehdi B, Larsen MS. The epidemiology of elbow fracture in children: analysis of 355 fractures, with special reference to supracondylar humerus fractures. J Orthop Sci. 2001;6:312–315. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Topping RE, Blanco JS, Davis TJ. Clinical evaluation of crossed-pin versus lateral-pin fixation in displaced supracondylar humerus fractures. J Pediatr Orthop. 1995;15:435–439. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Gartland JJ. Management of supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1959;109:145–154. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Parikh SN, Wall EJ, Foad S, et al. Displaced type II extension supracondylar humerus fractures: do they all need pinning? J Pediatr Orthop. 2004;24:h380–h384. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Mehlman CT, Crawford AH, McMillion TL, et al. Operative treatment of supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children: the Cincinnati experience. Acta Orthop Belg. 1996;62 suppl 1:41–50. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Skaggs DL, Hale JM, Bassett J, et al. Operative treatment of supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. The consequences of pin placement. Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83:735–740. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Ponce BA, Hedequist DJ, Zurakowski D, et al. Complications and timing of follow-up after closed reduction and percutaneous pinning of supracondylar humerus fractures: follow-up after percutaneous pinning of supracondylar humerus fractures. J Pediatr Orthop. 2004;24:610–614. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Larson AN, Garg S, Weller A, et al. Operative treatment of type II supracondylar humerus fractures: does time to surgery affect complications? J Pediatr Orthop. 2014;34:382–387. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Pullagura M, Odak S, Pratt R. Managing supracondylar fractures of the distal humerus in children in a district general hospital. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2013;95:582–585. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Murnaghan ML, Slobogean BL, Byrne A, et al. The effect of surgical timing on operative duration and quality of reduction in Type III supracondylar humeral fractures in children. J Child Orthop. 2010;4:153–158. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Gupta N, Kay RM, Leitch K, et al. Effect of surgical delay on perioperative complications and need for open reduction in supracondylar humerus fractures in children. J Pediatr Orthop. 2004;24:245–248. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Iobst CA, Spurdle C, King WF, et al. Percutaneous pinning of pediatric supracondylar humerus fractures with the semisterile technique: the Miami experience. J Pediatr Orthop. 2007;27:17–22. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Vallila N, Sommarhem A, Paavola M, et al. Pediatric distal humeral fractures and complications of treatment in Finland: a review of compensation claims from 1990 through 2010. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97:494–499. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Bickler SW, Sanno-Duanda B. Bone setter's gangrene. J Pediatr Surg. 2000;35:1431–1433. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42:377–381. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, et al. The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Abbott MD, Buchler L, Loder RT, et al. Gartland type III supracondylar humerus fractures: outcome and complications as related to operative timing and pin configuration. J Child Orthop. 2014;8:473–477. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Ernat J, Ho C, Wimberly RL, et al. Fracture classification does not predict functional outcomes in supracondylar humerus fractures: a prospective study. J Pediatr Orthop. 2017;37:e233–e237. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Sinikumpu JJ, Victorzon S, Pokka T, et al. The long-term outcome of childhood supracondylar humeral fractures: a population-based follow up study with a minimum follow up of ten years and normal matched comparisons. Bone Joint J. 2016;98-B:1410–1417. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Miranda I, Sanchez-Arteaga P, Marrachelli VG, et al. Orthopedic versus surgical treatment of Gartland type II supracondylar humerus fracture in children. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2014;23:93–99. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Hadlow AT, Devane P, Nicol RO. A selective treatment approach to supracondylar fracture of the humerus in children. J Pediatr Orthop. 1996;16:104–106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Moraleda L, Valencia M, Barco R, et al. Natural history of unreduced Gartland type-II supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children: a two to thirteen-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95:28–34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.O’Hara LJ, Barlow JW, Clarke NM. Displaced supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. Audit changes practice. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000;82:204–210. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Park MJ, Ho CA, Larson AN. AAOS appropriate use criteria: management of pediatric supracondylar humerus fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2015;23:e52–55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Valencia M, Moraleda L, Diez-Sebastian J. Long-term functional results of neurological complications of pediatric humeral supracondylar fractures. J Pediatr Orthop. 2015;35:606–610. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Colovic H, Stankovic I, Dimitrijevic L, et al. The value of modified DASH questionnaire for evaluation of elbow function after supracondylar fractures in children. Vojnosanit Pregl. 2008;65:27–32. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Scannell BP, Jackson JB, 3rd, Bray C, et al. The perfused, pulseless supracondylar humeral fracture: intermediate-term follow-up of vascular status and function. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95:1913–1919. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Martin-Herz SP, Zatzick DF, McMahon RJ. Health-related quality of life in children and adolescents following traumatic injury: a review. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2012;15:192–214. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Lim AH, Thomas D, Graham KH. Cross-sectional study to investigate the health-related quality of life in children with severe lower limb trauma in Victoria. J Paediatr Child Health. 2013;49:131–137. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Varni JW, Seid M, Kurtin PS. PedsQL 4.0: reliability and validity of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory version 4.0 generic core scales in healthy and patient populations. Med Care. 2001;39:800–812. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Holt JB, Glass NA, Shah AS. Understanding the epidemiology of pediatric supracondylar humeral fractures in the United States: identifying opportunities for intervention. J Pediatr Orthop. 2018;38:e245–e251. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Mitchelson AJ, Illingworth KD, Robinson BS, et al. Patient demographics and risk factors in pediatric distal humeral supracondylar fractures. Orthopedics. 2013;36:e700–e706. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Gofin R, Donchin M, Schulrof B. Motor ability: protective or risk for school injuries? Accid Anal Prev. 2004;36:43–48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Spinks AB, Scott D, Bain CJ, et al. Parental attitudes to supervision and risk of childhood injury: results from a primary school cohort. Int J Inj Contr Saf Promot. 2008;15:49–52. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Mangwani J, Nadarajah R, Paterson JM. Supracondylar humeral fractures in children: ten years’ experience in a teaching hospital. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:362–365. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Barr LV. Paediatric supracondylar humeral fractures: epidemiology, mechanisms and incidence during school holidays. J Childrens Orthop. 2014;8:167–170. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Kalkwarf HJ, Zemel BS, Gilsanz V, et al. The bone mineral density in childhood study: bone mineral content and density according to age, sex, and race. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007;92:2087–2099. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Zemel BS, Kalkwarf HJ, Gilsanz V, et al. Revised reference curves for bone mineral content and areal bone mineral density according to age and sex for black and non-black children: results of the bone mineral density in childhood study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011;96:3160–3169. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Khademolhosseini M, Abd Rashid AH, Ibrahim S. Nerve injuries in supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children: is nerve exploration indicated? J Pediatr Orthop B. 2013;22:123–126. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Babal JC, Mehlman CT, Klein G. Nerve injuries associated with pediatric supracondylar humeral fractures: a meta-analysis. Journal of pediatric orthopedics. 2010;30:253–263. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Ozkul E, Gem M, Arslan H, et al. Surgical treatment outcome for open supracondylar humerus fractures in children. Acta Orthop Belg. 2013;79:509–513. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Battle J, Carmichael KD. Incidence of pin track infections in children's fractures treated with Kirschner wire fixation. J Pediatr Orthop. 2007;27:154–157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Hussain S, Gul M, Dhar S. Open reduction and internal fixation of displaced proximal humerus fractures with AO Stainless Steel T-Plate. Malays Orthop J. 2014;8:8–13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Pretell-Mazzini J, Rodriguez-Martin J, Aunon-Martin I, et al. Controversial topics in the management of displaced supracondylar humerus fractures in children. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2011;6:43–50. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Li M, Xu J, Hu T, et al. Surgical management of Gartland type III supracondylar humerus fractures in older children: a retrospective study. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2019;28:530–535. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Han QL, Wang YH, Liu F. Comparison of complications and results of early versus delayed surgery for Gartland type III supracondylar humeral fractures in pediatric patients. Orthop Surg. 2011;3:242–246. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
