Fractures in Children
Fractures in Children
Fractures in Children
Walter P. Blount
To cite this article: Walter P. Blount (1954) Fractures in Children, Postgraduate Medicine, 16:3,
209-216, DOI: 10.1080/00325481.1954.11711663
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00325481.1954.11711663
Article views: 46
Fractures in Children
WALTER P. BLOUNT*
Milwaukee Children's Hospital, Milwaukee
FRACTURES in children are different from deformities. The degree of correctability de-
those in adults. The principles of treatment pends on three variables:
are simple. Alignment is the chief require- 1. The age of the child.
ment. The fracture should not be grossly angu- 2. The distance of the fracture from the
lated nor rotated. Accurate apposition and end of the bone.
normal length are not necessary in children. 3. The amount of angulation.
ln most cases, excellent results are obtained The younger the child and the nearer the frac-
by simple traction or closed reduction and a ture to the end of the bone, the greater the
cast.1 The exceptions which often require open deformity that is acceptable.
reduction are three relatively common frac- Third, there may be disastrous angulation
tures at the elbow and a few rare joint frac- and shortening from injury to an epiphysial
tures. Elsewhere, an open reduction in a child plate. The younger the child the worse the
is diffi.cult to justify. deformity.
In children, bones are not only living but
Fractures oj the Femur
growing. Continued growth after the fracture
is important for three reasons. First, growth Fractures of the shaft are uniformly weil
is frequently accelerated for severa} months treated with Russell traction in older children
following a fracture. This simple physiologie and with double overhead traction in younger
phenomenon is not "compensatory" but it ones. Avoid constricting bandages which may
tends to equalize shortness from overriding. cause ischemie necrosis. Proper adjustment
Second, molding will correct minor angular of weights and pulleys will align any such
fracture. Adduction of the proximal fragment
*Chairman, Ortbopaedic Section, Milwaukee Children's Hoapital.
Milwaukee, Wiscon1in. is corrected by traction with greater force
midsupination. Slight shortening is not sig- ties will be overcome by molding. ln older
nificant but angulation is not permissible. children more accurate reduction is necessary.
Malposition is an indication for more efficient Bayonet apposition is satisfactory. Alignment
conservative treatment and not for open re- can he maintained by traction. There is no
duction. justification for open reduction. The compli-
A complete fracture of both hones at the cations which occasionally follow operation
distal end of the forearm is usually angulated are inexcusable when the results with closed
with the apex volarward and with dorsal dis- methods are so good. 9
placement of the distal fragments (figure 4) .
There is a strong tendency for the angulation Epiphysial Fractures
to return after a reduction (figure 5). lm-· ln general, epiphysial fractures are best
mobilization should he by a cast above the treated by closed methods (figure 7 ) . Unless
flexed elbow with the forearm in pronation. there has heen damage to the growing cells of
Checkup roentgenograms are imperative after the epiphysial plate at the time of injury,
one or two days and again after a week. If slight overgrowth is the rule and retarded
angulation of less than 25 degrees has re- growth an exception. Violent longitudinal
curred, it may he ignored in children of less thrusts producing crushing injuries to the
than 10 years (figure 6). The amount of de- epiphysial plate are likely to cause serious
formity which is acceptable must be calcu- deformities from epiphysial arrest (figure 8) .
lated for each individual case. The younger After two weeks, considerable displacement is
the child and the nearer the fracture to the usually to he preferred to a forceful closed
bone end, the more angulation one may ac- reduction or open operation. There are defi-
cept. ln newhorn infants tremendous deformi- nite exceptions to this rule, usually in cases of
REFERENCES
1. BLOUNT, W. P.: Fractures in children. American Academy of humerus in children. Canad. M. A. J. 40:546, 1939.
Orthopaedic Surgeons, lnstructional Course Lectures, 7 :194, 1950. 6. CA.RLI, CARLo: Trazione col filo nelle fratture sovracondiloidee
2. BLOUNT, W. P., Sc&AEFRR, A. A. and Fox, G. W.: Fractures of di gomito del bambin o. Chir. d. org. di movimento 18:311, 1933.
the femur in children. South. M. ]. 37:481, 1944. 7. BLOUNT, W. P.: Volkmann's ischemie contracture. Surg., Gynec.
3. BLDUNT,W. P.: Unusual fractures in children. American Acad· & Obst. 90 :244, 1950.
emy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Inatructional Course Lectures, 8. Lzwts, R. W. and TamooEA.U, A. A.: Deformity of the wrist
11 :57' 1954. following resection of the radial head. Surg., Gynec. & Obst.
4. BLOUNT, W. P. and CLARK&, G. R.: Control of bone growth hy 64:1079, 1937.
epiphyaeal atapling. J. Bone & Joint Surg. 31·A:464, 1949. 9. BLOUNT, W. P., Sc&A.EFER, A. A. and JoHNSON, J. H.: Fractures
S. Aunm, L. ]. : Fracturea of the morphological neck of the of the lorearm in children. J. A. M. A. 120:111, 1942.