Abstract
BACKGROUND: Multiple scoring systems are used in the assessment of post-injury outcomes in pelvic fracture patients. Although commonly used, there is scarce evidence as to their validity.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the current literature to compare a well validated generic outcome tool (Short Form-36 (SF-36)) and three commonly used pelvic-specific outcome tools, the Iowa Pelvic Score, Majeed Pelvic Score and Orlando Pelvic Score.
RESULTS: Eleven papers were found that used both the SF-36 and one or more of the pelvic-specific outcome tools. The data demonstrate great variability in both the method of application and form of reporting.
CONCLUSION: The pelvic-specific tools produce similar results to the SF-36 and are potentially more sensitive in examining specific areas related to pelvic injuries and easier to perform and calculate than the SF-36.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 687-690 |
| Number of pages | 4 |
| Journal | ANZ Journal of Surgery |
| Volume | 86 |
| Issue number | 9 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Sept 2016 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Pelvic fracture-specific scales versus general patient reported scales for pelvic fracture outcomes: a systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver