Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Which external fixation device?

D Campbell, G E Kempson

    Injury
    |January 1, 1981
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    This study evaluates seven external fixation frames for fracture treatment, detailing their features, advantages, and disadvantages to aid clinical decision-making in orthopedic trauma care.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Endovascular treatment of bleeding external iliac artery pseudo-aneurysm following control of haemorrhage with Sengstaken tube during revision total hip arthroplasty.

    Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England·2007
    Same author

    Cautionary tales in the interpretation of systematic reviews of therapy trials.

    Internal medicine journal·2006
    Same author

    The analysis of 51 genes in DSM-IV combined type attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: association signals in DRD4, DAT1 and 16 other genes.

    Molecular psychiatry·2006
    Same author

    Effect of B vitamins and genetics on success of in-vitro fertilisation: prospective cohort study.

    Lancet (London, England)·2006
    Same author

    Primary mode of delivery and subsequent pregnancy.

    BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology·2005
    Same author

    Another case of anaphylaxis and fibrinolysis.

    Anaesthesia and intensive care·2005
    Same journal

    Impact of osteoporosis on outcomes following ankle open reduction and internal fixation.

    Injury·2026
    Same journal

    Cumulative traumatic life events and increased risk for emergency department and inpatient utilization after physical injury hospitalization.

    Injury·2026
    Same journal

    Advances in the management of chest wall injuries - Influence of new technical options.

    Injury·2026
    Same journal

    Trauma nursing as frontline health diplomacy: A binational ATCN program for Palestinian and Israeli nurses during conflict.

    Injury·2026
    Same journal

    Corrigendum to "Neutralizing the odds: Biomechanical protection by adiposity offsets physiological burden to explain the trauma.'obesity-paradox`" [Injury 57 (2) (2026) 112913].

    Injury·2026
    Same journal

    Agreement between ChatGPT and emergency physicians in laceration management: A prospective study.

    Injury·2026
    See all related articles

    Area of Science:

    • Orthopedic Surgery
    • Biomedical Engineering
    • Trauma Care

    Background:

    • External fixation frames are crucial orthopedic devices for managing complex fractures.
    • A variety of external fixation systems exist, each with unique design characteristics.
    • Understanding the specific attributes of these frames is essential for effective fracture management.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To systematically evaluate seven distinct external fixation frames.
    • To present the key features of each evaluated device.
    • To describe the advantages and disadvantages associated with each external fixation system.

    Main Methods:

    • Comparative analysis of seven commercially available external fixation frames.
    • Detailed description of the mechanical and functional features of each frame.

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Qualitative assessment of the pros and cons for each device based on design and application.

    • Main Results:

    • Each of the seven external fixation frames possesses unique structural and functional characteristics.
    • Specific advantages, such as ease of application or versatility, were identified for certain frames.
    • Disadvantages, including potential for pin loosening or limited adjustability, were noted for others.

    Conclusions:

    • The selection of an external fixation frame should be based on fracture type, patient factors, and desired clinical outcomes.
    • Awareness of the specific features, benefits, and limitations of each device optimizes treatment strategies.
    • Further research could involve biomechanical testing and clinical outcome studies for these frames.