Title Page
Contents
ABSTRACT 8
1. Introduction 10
2. Materials and Methods 12
2.1. Case selection 12
2.2. Methods of fracture evaluation 12
2.2.1. Long-bone fracture classification 12
2.2.2. Fracture patient assessment score 12
2.3. Methods of fracture repair 14
2.3.1. Anesthesia and preparation 14
2.3.2. Surgical procedure 14
2.4. Types of complications after fracture repair 15
2.5. Timing of fracture repair 15
2.6. Evaluation of complications after fracture repair 15
2.7. Statistical analysis 15
3. Results 16
3.1. Location of fracture 16
3.2. Distribution of fracture patient assessment score 16
3.3. Types of fracture repair 17
3.4. Types of complications after fracture repair 17
3.5. Timing of fracture repair after fracture 17
3.6. Evaluation of complications after fracture repair 18
3.6.1. Evaluation method according to the "Four As" system 18
3.6.2 Correlation between complications and fracture classification 18
3.6.3. Correlation between complications and fracture patient assessment score 18
3.6.4. Correlation between complications and surgical methods 19
3.6.5. Correlation between complications and timing of fracture repair after fracture 19
4. Discussion 27
5. Conclusion 32
References 33
Abstract (in Korean) 39
Table 1. Analysis of the fracture classification, incidence number, and types of postoperative complications for each long bone fracture. 20
Table 2. Fracture classification, fracture patient assessment score, surgical methods, and timing of fracture repair after fracture in cases of postoperative complications. 21
Table 3. Evaluation by the mnemonic of Four As and type of complications. 22
Figure 1. Photograph of the Unger system based on the AO/ASIF classification. (Alpha-numeric code) 13
Figure 2. Number of complications by fracture classification. 23
Figure 3. Number of complications by fracture patient assessment score group. 24
Figure 4. Number of complications by fixation method. 25
Figure 5. Number of complications by timing of fracture repair after fracture. 26