The Biophysical Modeling of Fracture Types
American Journal of Internal Medicine
Volume 8, Issue 1, January 2020, Pages: 34-39
Received: Jan. 21, 2020; Accepted: Feb. 10, 2020; Published: Feb. 18, 2020
Views 173      Downloads 69
Janos Vincze, Health Human International Environment Foundation, Budapest, Hungary
Gabriella Vincze-Tiszay, Health Human International Environment Foundation, Budapest, Hungary
Article Tools
Follow on us
The fracture leads immediately to the impossibility to perform certain movements, followed by tumefaction, sharp pain, haematoma, sometimes a visible deformation and even a wound of the skin, in the case of an open fracture. For any person who has the signs of fracture, that region must be immobilized immediately during first aid and for the final healing they must be taken to the hospital. A fracture can appear in various circumstances: through a direct- and indirect-mechanism or is called “pathological bone fracture”. The degree of fracture we distinguish: incomplete fractures, complete fractures and avulsions. The knowledge of fracture types has therapeutic implications. The very frequently fracture types are next: compression, rupture, bending, extension, torsion. In this paper we use the biophysical modeling of different fracture types. To get hold of the biophysical view is not an easy task, because it applies mathematical apparatus to biological systems, on the other hand as a reward it guides to fascinating results, recognizing theoretically which conformity of rules are valid on principle in the inanimate-living-spiritual triple system from the lowest to the highest organizational level.
Degree of Fracture, Biophysical Modeling, Fracture Types, Restoring Fitness
To cite this article
Janos Vincze, Gabriella Vincze-Tiszay, The Biophysical Modeling of Fracture Types, American Journal of Internal Medicine. Vol. 8, No. 1, 2020, pp. 34-39. doi: 10.11648/j.ajim.20200801.17
Copyright © 2020 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License ( which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
J, Vincze, Medical Biophysics. Tom I., II., and III. [in Hungarian: Orvosi biofizika] NDP P. Budapest, 2018.
Kogianni, G., Noble, B. S. (2007). The biology of osteocytes. Curr. Osteoporosis. Rep. 5: 81–86.
Olsen, B. R., Reginato, A. M., Wang, W. (2000). Bone development. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 16: 191–220.
Zaith, M. (2007). Skeletal remodelling in health and disease. Nat. Med. 13: 791–801.
J, Vincze, The Structure and Biomechanics of the Human Ske¬leton. NDP P. Budapest, 2014.
J, Vincze, The Microscopical Architectury of the Long Human’ Bones. NDP P. Budapest, 2017.
Bonasso, P. C., Dossinger, M. S., et al. (2018). Review of beside surgeon-performed ultrasound in pediatric patients. J. Pediatric Surg. 11: 2279–2289.
Eckert K., Ackermann, O. (2015) Frakturdiagnostik. Radiologie 11: 992–999.
Soles, G. L., Ferguson, T. A. (2012). Fragility fractures of the pelvis. 3: 222–228.
Neviaser, R. J., Resch, H., Neviaser, A. S., Crosby, L. A. (2015). Proximal humeral fractures. Course Lect. 64: 203–234.
Molnar, T. F. (2017). Thoracic trauma. Thorac. Surg. Clin. 27: 13–23.
Vachtaevanos L., Hayden, L., Desai, A. S., Dramis, A. (2014). Management of proximal fractures in adults. World J. Ortop. 5: 685–693.
Katzer, C., Wasem, J., Eckert, K., Ackermann, O., Buchberger, B. (2016) Utility of diagnostic ultrasound in evaluating fracture in children. Pediatr. Emerg. Care. 6: 401–417.
J, Vincze, Medical Biophysics. NDP P. Budapest, 2018.
Vincze, J. (1991). The Relationship between the Primary and Secondary Architectonis of the Bones. Acta Biologica, Debrecina Suppl. 10: 47–54.
J, Vincze, Biomechanics. NDP P., Budapest, 2016.
J, Vincze, The Capital Chapters of Physics. NDP P., Budapest, 2018.
Styrkarsdottir, U., Halldorson, B. V., Gretandottir, G. (2008). Multiple genetic loci for bone mineral density and fractures. N. Engl. J. Med. 358: 2355–2365.
Kanis, J. A. (1994). Treatment of osteoporotic fracture. Lancet, 1: 27–33.
Cheng, S. Y., Levy, A. R., Lefaivre K. A., et al. (2011). Geographic trends in incidence of hip fractures. Osteoporors Int. 10: 2575–2586.
Smith, A. J. Lloyd, D. G., Wood, D. J. (2006). A kinematic and kinetic analysis of walking after knee artroplasty. Cl. Biomechanics. 21: 379–387.
Huysmans T., Haer, B., Van Andekerecke, R., Van der Slotem, J., Van der Perre, G. (2004) Three-dimensional mathematical reconstruction of the spinal share, based on active conture. J. of Biomechanisc, 37: 1793–1798.
Lieberman, J. R., Dalnski, A. Einhorn, T. A.: (2002). The role of growth factors in the repair of bone. 84A: 1032–1044.
Schmid, G. L., Lippmann, S. et al. (2017). The investigation of suspected fracture. Dtsch. Arztebl. Int. 45: 757–764.
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
Tel: (001)347-983-5186