Home
ACE Reports
All Specialties All Specialties All Specialties Arthroplasty Arthroplasty Arthroplasty Evidence Based Medicine Evidence Based Medicine Evidence Based Medicine Foot & Ankle Foot & Ankle Foot & Ankle General Orthopaedics General Orthopaedics General Orthopaedics Hand & Wrist Hand & Wrist Hand & Wrist Metabolic Disorders Metabolic Disorders Metabolic Disorders Osteoarthritis Osteoarthritis Osteoarthritis Pediatric Orthopaedics Pediatric Orthopaedics Pediatric Orthopaedics Peri-Operative Peri-Operative Peri-Operative Physical Therapy & Rehab Physical Therapy & Rehab Physio & Rehab Shoulder & Elbow Shoulder & Elbow Shoulder & Elbow Spine Spine Spine Sports Medicine Sports Medicine Sports Medicine Trauma Trauma Trauma Tumour Tumour Tumour Author Interviews Author Interviews Author Interview Conference Report Conference Report Conference Reports
Original Content
News
Multimedia
About
Search
Home
ACE Reports
Arthroplasty Evidence Based Medicine Foot & Ankle General Orthopaedics Hand & Wrist Metabolic Disorders Osteoarthritis Pediatric Orthopaedics Peri-Operative Physical Therapy & Rehab Shoulder & Elbow Spine Sports Medicine Trauma Tumour Author Interviews Conference Report
Original Content
News
Multimedia
About
Search
Previous Ace Report Use of wound drain after unilateral total knee arthroplasty Next Ace Report Use of wound drain after unilateral total knee arthroplasty
Ace Report Cover
Trauma
Routine pin tract care is unnecessary in external fixation treatment
Reprints
Cite This
Reprints
Cite This
AceReport Image
Trauma
Routine pin tract care is unnecessary in external fixation treatment
Injury. 2012 Nov;43(11):1969-73. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2012.08.010. Epub 2012 Aug 16
Contributing Authors

Carlo Camathias Victor Valderrabano Hermann Oberli

56 patients who required a total of 204 pins for external fixation of compound fractures, closed fractures, or bony defects were included in this study to determine the efficacy of pin tract care in external fixation. The pins were randomized to receive daily pin site care or no treatment based on proximal and distal anatomical location. The results of this trial demonstrated that routine pin tract care was unnecessary, having no effect on infection rate or other complications when compared to the no care treatment.

Unlock the full article

Get unlimited access to OrthoEvidence with a free trial
Start Trial

Critical appraisals of the latest, high-impact randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in orthopaedics

Access to OrthoEvidence podcast content, including collaborations with the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviews with internationally recognized surgeons, and roundtable discussions on orthopaedic news and topics

Subscription to The Pulse, a twice-weekly evidence-based newsletter designed to help you make better clinical decisions

Exclusive access to original content articles, including in-house systematic reviews, and articles on health research methods and hot orthopaedic topics

Or continue reading this full article
Register Now
AskOE
Search
Close Search Window
Welcome Back!
Forgot Password?
Create an Account

Account will be affiliated with

OR
Forgot Password?
OR
Check your email

If an account exists with the provided email address, a password reset email will be sent to you. If you don't see the email, please check your spam or junk folder.

For further assistance, contact our support team.

Cite this Ace Report

OrthoEvidence. Routine pin tract care is unnecessary in external fixation treatment. ACE Report. 2013;3(8):338. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Report/

Copy Citation
Share this Ace Report