HIP FRACTURE
COMPARISON OF MEAN PAIN SCORE BETWEEN SKIN TRACTION VERSUS WITHOUT SKIN TRACTION IN CASES PRESENTING

Abdul Malik Shaikh, Muhammad Bakhsh Shahwani, Mohammad Ishaq
2018 The Professional Medical Journal  
ABSTRACT... Objectives: To compare mean pain score between skin traction versus without skin traction in cases presenting with hip fracture. Study Design: Multi-randomized controlled study. Setting: Materials and Methods: A total of 100 cases (50 in two groups) between 18-60 years of age including both genders presenting with unilateral femur fracture within 72 hours of injury were enrolled in this study. They were divided in two groups i.e. study and control group, study group was allotted to
more » ... he cases undergoing traction while control was those without using skin traction. Intramuscular diclofenac sodium injection (75 gm) was used in all participants and followed up for two tablets of paracetamol (500 mg) on 8 hourly basis. Visual analogue scale to record pain score, 0 was no pain and 10 was the severe pain, it was recorded at 24 hours of application of traction and second measurement was recorded just few minutes before the surgery is done. Results: In this study, mean age was calculated as 48.74+9.12 years, age range was 18-60 years. Male participants were in majority by calculating 64% (n=32) in Study and 58% (n=29) in control group while female cases were 36% (n=18) in cases and 42% (n=21) in control group. Mean pain score at 24 hours of traction in study and control group was recorded as 4.60+0.70 in study group and 5.30+0.82 in control group (P = 0.0553), shows a significant difference. Conclusion: Mean pain score is significantly reduced during first 24 hours of application of skin traction as compared to those without it in cases with hip fractures, however, it has no significant effect on pain after 24 hours of application. Article Citation: Shaikh AM, Shahwani MB, Ishaq M. HIP fracture; comparison of mean pain score between skin traction versus without skin traction in cases presenting.
doi:10.29309/tpmj/18.4179 fatcat:vxdqqody6bd5jnduhqethsfkn4