Talk:Colles' fracture

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Colles' fracture.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Colles' fracture is an incomplete term for Distal Radius Fracture and should only be applied to a particular pattern of distal radius fractures. Smith's (volarly flexed extra-aticular), Barton's( dorsal or volar intra-articular marginal), and Hutchinson's(radial styloid marginal) fractures are also eponymous terms for distal radius fracture. In my opinion we should make a page for Distal Radius Fracture, move all the content to it and redirect from Colles' Fracture or put a very short description to honour the name of Colles

Suggested template for Orthopaedic Conditions (see Talk:Orthopedic surgery) is
Name
Definition
Synonyms
Incidence
Pathogenesis
Pathology
Stages
Classification
Natural History/Untreated Prognosis
Clinical Features
Investigation
Non-Operative Treatment
Risks of Non-Operative Treatment
Prognosis following Non-Operative Treatment
Operative Treatment (Note that each operations should have its own wiki entry)
Risks of Operative Treatment
Prognosis Post Operation
Complications
Management
Prevention
History
--Mylesclough 05:34, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also, 58 cm is ridiculous, because it is longer than the radius itself. should this be 58 mm, and why 58 mm? Bart —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.79.108.1 (talk) 09:49, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

58 cm is wrong, 58 mm isn't. With one or two exceptions - notably the USA general public, everyone else in the medical fraternity now uses the metric system, so 58 mm is right — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.244.55.57 (talk) 12:51, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]