Advertisement

Phalangeal Fractures in the Athlete

  • James Logan
  • David Warwick
Chapter
Part of the In Clinical Practice book series (ICP)

Abstract

Phalangeal fractures are the most frequently encountered fractures in athletes. The vast majority of phalangeal fractures are intrinsically stable and require little more than a brief period of rest, elevation and splinting. Adjusted conditioning exercises can frequently be continued with minimal discomfort.

This chapter aims to cover the clinical assessment of the suspected finger fracture and required investigations. The principles of safe splintage will be discussed as will the importance of rehabilitation and decision-making with regard to return to play. Surgical strategies for the treatment of these fractures will be described in order to help appreciate what surgery can offer but also the shortcomings. Some understanding of the surgical procedures improves communication between surgeon and sports physician and will help to design appropriate rehabilitation programmes. We dispel the myth that surgical fixation with plate and screws will automatically mean a quicker recovery and return to play.

Keywords

Phalanx Extra-articular Deformity Stability Early mobilisation Nonoperative Splinting Surgery Stiffness Complications 

References

  1. 1.
    Belsky MR, Eaton RG, Lane LB. Closed reduction and internal fixation of proximal phalangeal fractures. J Hand Surg Am. 1984;9(5):725–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Freeland AE, Orbay JL. Extraarticular hand fractures in adults: a review of new developments. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;445:133–45.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.blo.0000205888.04200.c5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kurzen P, Fusetti C, Bonaccio M, Nagy L. Complications after plate fixation of phalangeal fractures. J Trauma. 2006;60(4):841–3.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ta.0000214887.31745.c4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Leininger RE, Knox CL, Comstock RD. Epidemiology of 1.6 million pediatric soccer-related injuries presenting to US emergency departments from 1990 to 2003. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35(2):288–93.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546506294060.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ouellette EA, Freeland AE. Use of the minicondylar plate in metacarpal and phalangeal fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;327:38–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Page SM, Stern PJ. Complications and range of motion following plate fixation of metacarpal and phalangeal fractures. J Hand Surg Am. 1998;23(5):827–32.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0363-5023(98)80157-3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smith NC, Moncrieff NJ, Hartnell N, Ashwell J. Pseudorotation of the little finger metacarpal. J Hand Surg Br. 2003;28(5):395–8.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-7681(03)00144-X.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weiss AP, Hastings H. Distal unicondylar fractures of the proximal phalanx. J Hand Surg Am. 1993;18(4):594–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0363-5023(93)90297-G.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • James Logan
    • 1
  • David Warwick
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of OrthopaedicsUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation TrustSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations