Journal of Clinical Densitometry
Volume 10, Issue 1 , Pages 93-101, January 2007

Hand Dominance and Bone Response After a Distal Radial Fracture: A peripheral QCT Study

  • M.C. Ashe

      Affiliations

    • University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
    • Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence to: Dr. M. C. Ashe, UBC Department of Family Practice, Bone Health Research Group, David Strangway Building, 3rd floor, 5950 University Boulevard, Vancouver BC V6T 1Z3, Canada.
  • ,
  • K.M. Khan

      Affiliations

    • British Columbia Women's and Children's Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
  • ,
  • J.C. Davis

      Affiliations

    • University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
    • Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
  • ,
  • P. Guy

      Affiliations

    • University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
    • Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
  • ,
  • H.A. McKay

      Affiliations

    • University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
    • Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Received 5 April 2006; received in revised form 8 August 2006; accepted 19 September 2006. published online 22 December 2006.

Abstract 

There are no reports on bone geometry or volumetric bone density adaptations in those who have sustained a distal radial fracture. We used peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to quantify bone and muscle response to immobilization. We measured side–side differences in women aged ≥50yr who had previously sustained a wrist fracture (4.0±3.5 mean yr since fracture). We used pQCT and DXA to measure bone in 31 women (mean age 72.4±9.7yr) at the 4% and 30% sites of bilateral radii; measured grip strength and functional outcome. Initially, we compared the fractured side to intact side and did not control for hand dominance. We observed greater total area (ToA) at the distal (4%) radius on the fractured side without a significant increase in density. At the midshaft (30% site), we observed significantly less ToA and cortical bone on the fracture side. Grip strength was also significantly less on the fractured side (p<0.01). We assessed dominant side fractures and nondominant fractures separately. We observed a greater discrepancy between limbs with a nondominant side fracture, even after accounting for dominance. This cross-sectional study suggests that the bone response to a nondominant fracture may differ from a dominant fracture.

Key Words: pQCT, DXA, fracture, immobilization

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1094-6950(06)00260-5

doi:10.1016/j.jocd.2006.09.004

Journal of Clinical Densitometry
Volume 10, Issue 1 , Pages 93-101, January 2007