GC232 Paediatric Musculoskeletal Injury

Musculoskeletal injuries in children, including fractures, dislocations, and soft tissue injuries, that require special consideration due to the presence of growth plates and ongoing skeletal development.

Paediatric Musculoskeletal Injury

This lecture by Professor Michael To covers the fundamental differences between the paediatric and adult skeleton, how those differences dictate unique fracture patterns, healing potential, and treatment strategies in children. The lecture is organised into five modules:

  1. Immature Skeleton — Anatomical and physiological differences
  2. Paediatric Fractures — Unique fracture types, remodelling, acceptable deformity
  3. Physeal Injury — Salter-Harris classification, growth arrest
  4. Fracture Treatments in Children — Principles, supracondylar fracture of humerus (high-yield case)
  5. Non-Accidental Injury (NAI) & Pathological Fractures — Red flags, skeletal dysplasia, osteogenesis imperfecta

Learning Outcomes: By the end of this lecture, you should be able to (1) understand the differences between adult and paediatric patients in fracture care, and (2) understand the management of common paediatric fractures. [1]

Why this matters for exams: The in-house Fourth Summative directly tests paediatric fracture management — MCQ Q47 (2025) tested NAI recognition in a 10-month-old with femoral shaft fracture; MCQ Q16 (2023) tested greenstick fracture management. Supracondylar fracture complications, Salter-Harris classification, and NAI red flags are perennial favourites. [1][2][3]



Module 1: The Immature Skeleton

The paediatric skeleton is NOT simply a smaller version of the adult skeleton. It differs in anatomy, physiology, and biomechanics. [1]

FeaturePaediatricAdultClinical Significance
Bone densityLess dense, more porotic, more vascularDense cortical boneLess force needed to fracture; fractures heal faster due to rich blood supply [1]
PeriosteumThicker and strongerThin, adherentActs as a "sleeve" — maintains fracture alignment, serves as source of callus formation [1]
Growth centresPresent (physis + secondary ossification centres)Absent (fused)Provide longitudinal growth; injury → growth arrest or angular deformity [1]
Ligaments vs boneLigaments relatively stronger than boneBone strongerFractures more common than dislocations in children [1]

High Yield

Fractures are more common than dislocations in children because the growth plate (physis) and porous metaphyseal bone are the weakest links in the musculoskeletal chain — weaker than ligaments. In adults, the reverse is true. [1]

  • The paediatric skeleton has the ability to grow. Ossification centres are programmed to ossify at specific times. [1]
  • Knowing the order and timing of ossification centres is critical for interpreting paediatric elbow X-rays (where misinterpreted ossification centres can be mistaken for fracture fragments or vice versa).

CRITOE Mnemonic (Elbow Ossification Centres)

Radiographs – CRITOE [1]

LetterCentreApproximate Age of Appearance
CCapitellum1 year
RRadial head3 years
IInternal (medial) epicondyle5 years
TTrochlea7 years
OOlecranon9 years
EExternal (lateral) epicondyle11 years

Why this matters: If you see an "ossification centre" out of sequence on X-ray, suspect an avulsion fracture. The medial epicondyle is the most commonly avulsed — if you see it but NOT the trochlea, that's normal. If you see the trochlea but NOT the medial epicondyle, the "missing" medial epicondyle may be trapped in the joint.

  • The growth contribution of each growth plate is different. [1]
  • Lower limb growth — the distal femoral physis contributes ~70% of femoral length and ~37% of total leg length; the proximal tibial physis contributes ~57% of tibial length.
  • Clinically: injuries near highly contributing physes carry greater risk of significant limb length discrepancy.

Upper Limb Epiphyseal Growth Contributions

BoneProximal PhysisDistal Physis
Humerus80%20%
Radius25%75%
Ulna80%20%

The proximal humerus and proximal ulna contribute ~80% of their respective bone length, while the distal radius contributes ~75% of radial length. [1]

Clinical relevance: The distal humerus contributes only ~20% of humeral growth — this is why supracondylar fractures have poor remodelling potential. Conversely, distal radial physeal injuries carry greater risk of significant growth disturbance because the distal radius is the dominant growth centre.


Module 2: Paediatric Fracture Patterns, Healing & Remodelling

50% of deaths in children < 14 are related to trauma. 15% of childhood injuries involve the musculoskeletal system. Most paediatric trauma are single extremity, low energy injuries. Upper limb fracture > lower limb fractures. [1]

Because paediatric bone is more elastic with a thick periosteum, three fracture patterns occur that are essentially never seen in adults [1]:

PatternDescriptionMechanismWhy It Happens
Greenstick fractureIncomplete fracture — one cortex breaks, the opposite cortex bendsBending forceElastic bone bends before it fully snaps — like a green twig
Torus (buckle) fractureCompression failure of one cortex — cortex buckles outwardAxial compression (e.g. FOOSH)Trabecular bone at metaphysis compresses and buckles rather than shattering
Plastic deformationBone bends without a visible fracture lineBending forceBone undergoes micro-failures along its length but the periosteum prevents complete fracture

Biomechanical basis (stress–strain curve): Slide 15 illustrates that a 2-year-old's bone has a lower peak stress but tolerates a greater strain range (more elastic deformation) before failure, with stepwise micro-failures. A 46-year-old's bone reaches higher peak stress but fails abruptly with less strain. This explains why children sustain greenstick/plastic deformation injuries rather than the comminuted fractures seen in adults. [1]

Exam Trap

Ligament injury is less common in children [1]. If you see an MCQ stem describing a child with a "ligament injury," think twice — consider a physeal injury (Salter-Harris) or avulsion fracture first.

More rapid healing of fractures: Physis > Metaphysis > Diaphysis [1]

Why? The closer to the growth plate, the richer the blood supply and the more active the periosteum → more rapid callus formation and healing. This is why metaphyseal fractures heal in weeks, while diaphyseal fractures take longer.

  • May result in growth acceleration — especially at the proximal tibia and femur [1]
  • This is due to fracture-related hyperaemia stimulating the nearby growth plate
  • Clinically: some shortening is allowed in paediatric femoral shaft fractures (e.g. 1–2 cm overlap) because overgrowth will compensate

Remodelling

Remodelling depends on: endochondral ossification, periosteal bone formation, and integrated resorption. [1]

The concept: After a malunited fracture in a child, the bone can gradually reshape itself towards normal anatomy — but only under certain conditions.

Acceptable limit of deformities based on anticipated remodelling: [1]

  1. Child's age / growth potential remaining — younger = more remodelling
  2. Distance of fracture from end of bone — closer to physis = more remodelling
  3. Longitudinal growth potential of that physis — higher contribution = more remodelling
  4. Amount and direction of angulation — angulation in the plane of adjacent joint movement remodels well; rotational deformity does NOT remodel well

Critical Principle

Good remodelling in the plane of adjacent joint movement. A fracture near the knee that is angulated in the sagittal plane (flexion/extension plane) will remodel well because the knee moves in that plane. Varus/valgus angulation remodels poorly. Rotational deformity does NOT remodel. [1]

Age GroupApproachRationale
0–5 yearsMost conservativeGreatest remodelling potential
5–12 yearsIntermediateModerate remodelling
> 12 yearsBetter anatomical reduction and more stable fixation neededApproaching skeletal maturity → limited remodelling [1]

Treatment strategies could be different from adults — children tolerate more conservative management due to healing and remodelling advantages. [1]


Module 3: Physeal (Growth Plate) Injury

The physis (growth plate) has distinct histological zones [1]:

ZoneFunction
Reserve (Germinal) zoneStem cells; if damaged → growth arrest
Proliferative zoneActive cell division
Hypertrophic zoneMost commonly injured zone — cells are large and the matrix is weakest here [1]
Calcification zoneProvisional calcification
Enchondral ossification zoneNew bone formation

Additional periosteal/perichondral structures (from Slide 26 diagram) [1]:

  • Periosteal sleeve — continuous periosteal covering that bridges the physis
  • Ring of LaCroix — fibrous ring at the periphery of the physis providing mechanical support
  • Zone of Ranvier — wedge-shaped area of cells at the physis periphery contributing to latitudinal (appositional) growth of the growth plate
  • Blood supply: The physis receives dual blood supply from epiphyseal arteries (supplying the germinal/proliferative zones) and metaphyseal arteries (supplying the zone of endochondral ossification). The hypertrophic zone is relatively avascular, contributing to its vulnerability.

Which zone is the most commonly injured? Hypertrophic zone. [1]

Why? The hypertrophic chondrocytes are large and the extracellular matrix is sparse in this zone — it is structurally the weakest layer. This is why Salter-Harris type I and II fractures propagate through this zone. The important implication: the germinal zone (on the epiphyseal side) is usually spared → good prognosis.

Salter-Harris Classification [1] — This is an absolute must-know for exams.

TypeDescriptionFracture Line PathPrognosisManagement
ISeparation of epiphysis from metaphysis; mild displacement; intact periosteumThrough hypertrophic zone onlyGood prognosisClosed reduction + cast
IIEpiphysis–metaphysis separation with fragment of metaphysis attached ("Thurston-Holland fragment"); strained/torn epiphyseal periosteumThrough hypertrophic zone + exits through metaphysisGood prognosis with appropriate treatmentClosed reduction + cast; Most common type
IIIPhyseal separation associated with epiphyseal fracture; intra-articular; fracture through germinal layerThrough hypertrophic zone + exits through epiphysis into jointPoor prognosis (crosses germinal zone)ORIF (anatomical reduction needed — intra-articular)
IVExtended from metaphysis across growth plate into epiphysisThrough metaphysis + physis + epiphysisPoor prognosisORIF
VCrush fracture of part or whole physis from compressionCompression injury — may not be visible on initial X-rayPoor prognosis; highest risk of growth arrestNo specific acute treatment; close follow-up

Memory aid (SALTR): Straight across (I), Above (II), Lower (III), Through and through (IV), Ram/crush (V) [5]

High Yield

Salter-Harris Type II is the most common physeal injury. Types III–V have poor prognosis because they involve the germinal zone and/or cross the physis, leading to bone bar formation and growth arrest. [1]

Salter type III, IV, V (injury extending to epiphysis) → formation of vertical septa → structural disorganisation → bone bridge formation → growth arrest or deformity [1]

  • If the germinal zone is NOT damaged: great remodelling potential
  • If damaged: growth retardation depends on location of bone bar and size of bone bar [1]
    • Central bone bar → progressive angular deformity + shortening
    • Peripheral bone bar → angular deformity (tethering effect)
    • Large bar (> 50% of physis) → likely to cause significant arrest

Bone bar location patterns (from Slide 28 diagrams) [1]:

  • Peripheral (eccentric) bone bar → tethering effect → angular deformity
  • Central bone bar → growth arrest centrally while periphery continues → progressive angular deformity + shortening

Clinical case from slides: 1-year-old girl with right knee injury → developed progressive genu valgum (valgus deformity of the knee), lateral subluxation of patella, ROM 0–100°, limb length discrepancy of 1 cm — all from physeal damage [1]


Module 4: Fracture Treatment in Children

Nervous child, unable to give a good history, uncooperative in physical examination, anxious parents. [1]

Practical tip: Observe the child before touching. Watch how they use the limb, whether they guard it, whether they cry when a specific area is palpated. Use distraction techniques. Get the history from the parent but also observe the child's behaviour — inconsistencies may raise concern for NAI.

Similar to adult trauma: ABC… Investigations [1]

Age-specific vital signs (from lecture slide — high yield for recognising shock in paediatric trauma):

AgeWeight (kg)Blood Volume (mL/kg)Pulse (/min)Systolic BP (mmHg)RR (/min)
Birth3.590140–1608040
6 months6.090140–1608040
1 year12.085120–1609030
4 years16.080120–1409030
10 years35.075100–12010020
15 years55.07080–10011020

Why these numbers matter: Children maintain blood pressure until very late in haemorrhagic shock (compensated shock with tachycardia). By the time BP drops, they've lost 25–30% blood volume. Tachycardia is the earliest sign.

Look out for associated soft tissue injuries: [1]

  • Open wound (open fracture)
  • Skin blistering / abrasions / necrosis
  • Skin impingement by fracture ends
  • Subcutaneous swelling
  • Nerve palsy
  • Vascular injury → Compartment syndrome

X-ray examination: to confirm fracture; to assess configuration (spiral/oblique/transverse/butterfly/comminuted, greenstick/torus/plastic deformation); to assess alignment [1]

Displaced? → Reduction if necessary (pain control, anaesthesia). Stability? → Immobilisation if necessary. Function? → Rehabilitation always. [1]

Good healing and remodelling potential → relatively less post-op contracture → more conservative treatment [1]

Case example from slides: M/2 (male, 2 years old) fell from trampoline — femoral shaft fracture → treated with traction followed by hip spica → X-rays at 2.5 weeks showed callus → 6 weeks post-injury progressing well → 3 months further remodelling → 1 year: unrestricted activity [1]

Key teaching point: In a 2-year-old with a femoral shaft fracture, operative fixation is generally NOT needed. Conservative management with traction + hip spica is appropriate because of the excellent healing and remodelling potential at this age. In older children (> 5–6 years), elastic nails or other fixation may be preferred.

Age-Based Fixation Progression

The slide series (Slides 21, 38, 44) illustrates a spectrum of fixation methods used in children, with increasing rigidity as the child approaches skeletal maturity [1]:

Age GroupTypical FixationExamples
0–5 yearsCast / traction / hip spicaFemoral shaft fracture in a toddler
5–12 yearsFlexible (elastic) intramedullary nailsFemoral / tibial shaft fractures
> 12 yearsPlate-and-screw fixation, rigid IM nailsApproaching adult-type fixation

Other methods shown in slides: percutaneous K-wires (supracondylar fractures), external fixation (open fractures, severe soft-tissue injury). [1]


Module 4 (continued): Supracondylar Fracture of Humerus — The High-Yield Case

Involves thin bone between coronoid fossa and olecranon fossa of distal humerus. Occurs most often around age 6–7 years. [1]

Why here? The distal humerus has a very thin cross-section between the coronoid and olecranon fossae — this creates a structurally weak area prone to fracture when a child falls on an outstretched hand (FOOSH) with the elbow hyperextended.

Potentially Problematic! Vascular Injuries, Neurologic Deficits, Cubitus Varus/Recurvatum, Volkmann's Contracture [1]

Two types: Extension type (95%) and Flexion type. Most displaced fractures (Type III) are of extension type (97%). [1]

Extension type (child falls on outstretched hand → elbow hyperextended → distal fragment displaces posteriorly):

Gartland TypeDescription
Type IUndisplaced
Type IIDisplaced with intact posterior cortex (hinged)
Type IIIDisplaced with no cortical contact (completely displaced) [1]

Swelling and tenderness of the forearm compartments. "Dimple sign" occurs when a spike of bone penetrates brachialis muscle and anterior subcutaneous tissues. [1]

Neurovascular injuries? Compartment syndrome? Check and recheck radial pulse and its quality. Remember that an intimal arterial injury can occur slowly over several hours. [1]

Associated injuries: Always obtain X-rays of the entire forearm including the wrist in supracondylar fractures — associated forearm fractures (ipsilateral distal radius/ulna) can coexist and may be missed if imaging is limited to the elbow (Slide 51). [1]

Clinical Pearl

An intimal arterial injury (brachial artery) can present HOURS after the initial injury. A normal pulse on initial assessment does NOT rule out vascular injury. Serial neurovascular checks are mandatory. [1]

Fat pad signs — Visible on lateral elbow X-ray [1]

  • Anterior fat pad: normally visible as a thin line; becomes sail-shaped (elevated) when there is an effusion → suggests intra-articular fracture
  • Posterior fat pad: normally NOT visible; if visible → pathological — strongly suggests occult fracture

Acceptable alignment assessed by [1]:

  • Anterior humeral line — should bisect the middle third of the capitellum on lateral view; if it passes anterior to the capitellum, there is posterior displacement
  • Baumann angle — angle between the long axis of the humeral shaft and the growth plate line of the lateral condyle on AP view; normal range 9–26 degrees [1]
  • Lateral and medial cortices — assess for cortical step or disruption

Gartland TypeTreatment
Type I (undisplaced)Conservative treatment — collar and cuff / above-elbow backslab in 60–90° flexion [1]
Type II (displaced, posterior cortex intact)Closed reduction + above-elbow cast OR percutaneous pinning if unstable
Type III (completely displaced)Closed reduction + percutaneous pinning (K-wires) under GA [1]

What the fixation films show: AP/lateral elbow after crossed percutaneous K-wires with cast — Type III needs stable pinning, not “mould and hope,” because distal humerus remodels poorly. [1]

Reasons for open reduction: [1]

  1. Vascular compromise (brachial artery injury with absent pulse + signs of ischaemia)
  2. Failure of closed reduction due to soft tissue interposition (e.g. buttonhole through the brachialis muscle)

Drawbacks of open reduction: Elbow stiffness, myositis ossificans, neurovascular injury [1]

Anterior Interosseous Nerve (AIN) — most commonly injured nerve in extension-type supracondylar fractures [1]

NerveTestFracture Type Association
AIN (branch of median)Unable to make an "OK" sign (pinch between thumb IP + index DIP — loss of FPL + FDP to index)Extension type, posteromedial displacement
Median nerveLoss of sensation over radial 3.5 digits, weak thumb oppositionExtension type
Radial nerveWrist drop, finger drop, loss of sensation over 1st dorsal web spaceExtension type, posterolateral displacement
Ulnar nerveClaw hand, loss of sensation over ulnar 1.5 digitsFlexion type

Neurological injury: difficult to examine, may not be able to identify, detailed documentation needed. Majority due to neuropraxia. Generally NOT considered an indication for open reduction/exploration. [1]

Exam Discriminator

Nerve palsy alone is NOT an indication for open reduction — most are neuropraxia and will recover. Only vascular compromise (absent pulse + signs of ischaemia) or irreducible fracture warrants open surgery. [1]

Complications

The most common complication of supracondylar fracture. Resulted from mal-reduction/malunion or physeal damage. Cosmetic deformity but little functional deficit. [1]

Why it happens: Malreduction with medial tilt of the distal fragment → heals with a varus angulation → the carrying angle is reversed. The distal humerus does NOT remodel in the coronal plane because the elbow is a hinge joint that moves in the sagittal plane.

Rotational malalignment: Though rotational deformity of the distal humerus can be partially compensated by shoulder rotation, remodelling of rotational deformity is usually suboptimal and is not acceptable in most centres (Slide 60). [1]

High Yield

Supracondylar fracture has POOR remodelling potential — unlike most paediatric fractures. This is because the distal humerus contributes only ~20% of humeral growth, and coronal-plane angulation does not remodel in a joint that moves in the sagittal plane. This is why accurate reduction is critical. [1]

Result from residual dorsal angulation of the fracture [1]

Resulting from brachial artery injury usually associated with supracondylar fracture of humerus → compartment syndrome → loss of motor and sensory function, claw hand deformity. Highly associated with casting > 90 degrees flexion. [1]

What the Volkmann photo shows: flexed wrist and clawed fingers — the end-stage of missed compartment ischaemia after a tight flexed cast. [1]

Pathophysiology: Brachial artery injury (thrombosis, spasm, or compression by fracture fragment) → forearm compartment ischaemia → muscle necrosis → fibrosis → contracture. The flexor muscles are most affected → results in wrist and finger flexion contracture with intrinsic-minus (claw) hand.

Prevention: Do NOT flex the elbow beyond 90° when immobilising. Serial neurovascular checks. Immediate release of any constrictive dressing/cast if compartment syndrome is suspected.

Fracture treatment principle: children's physiology is different from adults. Supracondylar fracture of humerus has poor remodelling potential and treatment can be challenging. [1]


Module 5: Non-Accidental Injury (NAI) & Pathological Fractures

Non-accidental injury or physical abuse — deliberately inflicted on a vulnerable person [1]

Red flags for NAI (from lecture):

  1. Injury and history given are inconsistent
  2. Delay in seeking medical attention
  3. Multiple fractures
  4. Retinal haemorrhage
  5. Torn frenulum
  6. History of household falls resulting in fracture [1]

High Yield — NAI Recognition

In the 2025 MCQ Q47, a 10-month-old baby with right femoral shaft oblique fracture AND right distal radius metaphyseal fracture after a reported household fall 2 days ago is presented. The correct answer is B — Multi-disciplinary meeting with paediatricians and medical social workers — because the injury pattern is inconsistent with a household fall in a pre-ambulatory infant, there is a delay in presentation, and there are multiple fractures. [2][3]

Additional NAI features from AOS material: [4]

  • A pre-ambulatory infant (< 12 months) with a long bone fracture should ALWAYS raise suspicion
  • Skeletal survey is the most important investigation — it can reveal hidden/healing fractures at different stages [4]
  • Metaphyseal corner fractures ("bucket-handle" or "chip" fractures) — highly specific for NAI
  • Posterior rib fractures — highly specific for NAI (from squeezing)
  • Spiral fractures of long bones in non-ambulatory children — suspicious

A pathologic fracture is a break in a bone caused by an underlying disease: primary malignant lesions, benign lesions, metastasis, or underlying metabolic abnormalities. [1]

Examples given in slides:

  • Osteosarcoma — primary malignant bone tumour
  • Fibrous Dysplasia — benign condition with abnormal fibrous tissue replacing normal bone
  • Osteogenesis Imperfecta (OI) — inherited collagen disorder
  • Osteopetrosis — abnormally dense but brittle bone

771 disorders associated with 552 genes based on DNA sequencing; 41 groups; abnormal bone and cartilage formation [1]

Case from slides: M/6 years 9 months from Guizhou province, multiple fractures since 1 year old due to trivial trauma, treated by bone setter with wooden splints, unable to walk for > 3 years. Diagnosed as Type V Osteogenesis Imperfecta. [1]

Management: Surgical correction (intramedullary nailing) + post-op rehabilitation:

  • Tilt table standing in cast by 4 weeks
  • Cast removal by 8 weeks
  • Post-op 10 months: able to stand
  • Post-op 18 months: walk unaided

Though these conditions are not common, we need to be cautious. Treatment for the underlying cause is important. [1]


Musculoskeletal injuries are common in children. Children are NOT small adults. Key considerations include differences in anatomy, physiology, and biomechanical properties; fracture healing and remodelling capacity; and physeal injury with its complications. [1]


Clinical Approach Summary

ComponentDetails
Mechanism of injuryFOOSH, fall from height, RTA, trivial trauma (consider pathological fracture)
TimingWhen did it happen? Any delay? (NAI red flag)
SymptomsPain, swelling, deformity, inability to move limb
Past fracture historyRecurrent fractures → OI, metabolic bone disease
Family historyOI, skeletal dysplasia
Social historyWho was supervising? Consistent story from both parents? Changes in story?

  1. Look: Swelling, deformity, bruising, open wound, skin dimpling, blistering
  2. Feel: Tenderness, crepitus, warmth
  3. Move: Active > passive (in a child, observe spontaneous movement first)
  4. Neurovascular status: Pulses (compare with contralateral), capillary refill, sensation, motor function — check and recheck [1]
  5. Compartment syndrome signs: Pain on passive stretch, tense swelling, pain out of proportion
  6. NAI screen: Bruises at different stages of healing, torn frenulum, retinal haemorrhage, injuries in non-ambulatory child

InvestigationIndication
X-ray (2 views + joint above and below)Confirm fracture, assess configuration and alignment
Contralateral X-rayCompare ossification centres in children
Skeletal surveySuspected NAI
MRIPhyseal injury, occult fracture, soft tissue
CTComplex intra-articular fractures, OI planning
BloodsCa, PO₄, ALP, Vitamin D (metabolic bone disease); CBC, CRP (infection)

  1. Pain control — paracetamol, ibuprofen, intranasal fentanyl, regional blocks
  2. Reduction — if displaced beyond acceptable limits for age/location
  3. Immobilisation — POP cast, backslab, hip spica, traction
  4. Fixation — percutaneous K-wires, elastic nails, rarely plates/screws (avoid crossing open physes)
  5. Rehabilitation — early mobilisation when stable
  6. Follow-up — serial X-rays to monitor alignment and healing; watch for growth arrest (especially after physeal injuries — may not manifest for months/years)

Exam Intelligence

TrapCorrect Understanding
"Children remodel all fractures"Rotational deformity does NOT remodel. Coronal plane angulation at the distal humerus does NOT remodel well. Closer to skeletal maturity = less remodelling. [1]
"Nerve palsy after supracondylar fracture needs surgical exploration"Most are neuropraxia — observe. Only vascular compromise or irreducible fracture warrants open surgery. [1]
"Normal pulse = no vascular injury"Intimal injury can develop over hours. Serial checks required. [1]
"Greenstick fracture needs ORIF"Most greenstick fractures are managed conservatively with POP cast (2023 MCQ Q16 — Answer A) [3]
"Pre-ambulatory infant with femoral fracture from household fall is accidental"Almost always NAI — multi-disciplinary assessment needed (2025 MCQ Q47 — Answer B) [2]
Confusing Salter-Harris type II (good prognosis) with type III–V (poor prognosis)Type II = most common, good prognosis. Types III–V cross germinal zone → growth arrest risk. [1]
"Cast at > 90° flexion is safe for supracondylar fracture"Highly associated with Volkmann's contracture. Keep < 90° flexion. [1]

FeatureSupracondylar FractureFemoral Shaft Fracture (young child)
Age6–7 years peakAny age
RemodellingPoor (distal humerus)Excellent
TreatmentCR + percutaneous pinning (Type III)Traction + hip spica (age < 5)
Growth accelerationMinimalYes — overgrowth expected
Key complicationCubitus varus, Volkmann's contractureLimb length discrepancy

AOS Practice Question (Q2) [4]

Question

A 3-month-old boy brought to MCHC for immunisation. Swelling over left mid-thigh, decreased leg movement compared to right. Bruise over nose, torn frenulum. Mother reports accidental fall from baby cot a few days ago. No medical attention sought. X-ray: mid-shaft left femoral fracture.

Which investigation is MOST IMPORTANT?

  • A. Clotting profile
  • B. CBC
  • C. Liver and renal biochemistry
  • D. Skeletal survey


Paediatric musculoskeletal infection (osteomyelitis, septic arthritis) can mimic fracture in a child who presents with a painful, non-weight-bearing limb. Key discriminator: fever + elevated inflammatory markers without trauma history → think infection. [6]

The NAI module in this lecture connects directly to GC 143 (A child with multiple bruises). Features from that lecture that reinforce this one: unexplained injuries, injuries at different stages of healing, delay in seeking medical care, and inconsistent or changing stories. [7]

CFB slides reinforce that paediatric orthopaedics is governed by the concept that "children are not small adults" — the growth plate is the key differentiator. [8]

The 2025 MCQ Q48 tests knee OA in adults — a completely different pathophysiology from paediatric physeal injury. Do not confuse degenerative joint disease (adult) with growth plate disruption (child).


High Yield Summary

  1. Children are NOT small adults.

    • Key exam points:
  2. Immature skeleton

    • less dense, more porous, thicker periosteum → unique fracture patterns (greenstick, torus, plastic deformation) and faster healing
  3. Remodelling

    • depends on age, distance from physis, growth contribution, and direction of angulation. Rotational deformity does NOT remodel. Near the distal humerus, remodelling is POOR
  4. Salter-Harris classification

    • Type II is most common (good prognosis). Types III–V cross germinal zone → risk of growth arrest and bone bar formation
  5. Supracondylar fracture of humerus

    • most common elbow fracture in children (age 6–7); extension type (95%); complications include cubitus varus (most common), Volkmann's contracture, AIN palsy; nerve palsy alone is NOT an indication for open reduction; do NOT cast at > 90° flexion
  6. NAI

    • always suspect in pre-ambulatory child with fracture, multiple fractures, inconsistent history, delayed presentation, retinal haemorrhage, torn frenulum. Skeletal survey is the key investigation. MDT approach is mandatory
  7. Pathological fractures

    • consider OI, tumours, skeletal dysplasia when fractures occur with minimal trauma

Active Recall - Paediatric Musculoskeletal Injury

[1] GC 232. Paediatric Musculoskeletal Injury [Updated in 2025].pdf (all modules, pp. 1–80) [2] 2025 Fourth Summative MCQ.pdf (Q47, p.19) [3] 2023 Fourth Summative MCQ.pdf (Q16, p.7) [4] AOS - Paeds.pdf (Q2, p.1) [5] Maksim Surgery Notes.pdf (Salter-Harris table, p.212) [6] GC 237. Musculoskeletal infection [Updated in 2025].pdf [7] GC 143. A child with multiple bruises_child abuse.pdf [8] CFB (OT01) Introduction to Orthopaedic Surgery.pdf

On this page

No Headings