INTRODUCTION The purpose of the study was to evaluate the injury-treatment time interval in a group of patients with limb bone fractures over the period of one year; and to compare this interval in the most frequent fractures of the upper and lower limb. MATERIAL AND METHODS The followed-up group of the prospective one-year monocentric study included 3,148 patients treated consecutively for 3,909 fractures. For the purpose of sub-analysis of the injury-treatment time interval in limb bone fractures, excluded from the group were the patients with multiple fractures (520 pts), patients with spinal fractures (356 pts) and pelvic fractures (210 pts). The statistical significance of the achieved results was tested with the use of contingency tables (chi-square test of independence). The significance level for the quantified tests was set at 5%. RESULTS The sub-analysis covered 1,727 patients whose medical records mentioned the exact time of injury and first examination. Within the first 6 hours after the injury, 536 (56.0%) patients with an upper limb bone fracture and 429 (55.7%) patients with a lower limb bone fracture were treated. Within 24 hours after the injury, 683 (71.4%) patients with an upper limb bone fracture and 572 (74.3%) patients with a lower limb bone fracture were treated. Within the first 24 hours after the injury, 104 (76.4%) patients with a proximal humerus fracture, 240 (84.5%) patients with a distal radius fracture and only 174 (55.5%) patients with metacarpal and phalanx fractures were treated. In the first hours after the injury, most frequently treated were the patients who sustained a distal radius fracture, and the longest injurytreatment time interval was seen in patients with hand bone fractures. The difference in the 24hour injury-treatment interval was significant when comparing distal radius fractures and proximal humerus fractures (p = 0.047) and when comparing distal radius fractures and hand bone fractures (p < 0.001). Within 24 hours after the injury, 166 (83.3%) patients with a proximal humerus fracture, 128 (79.1%) patients with an ankle fracture and 142 (63.4%) patients with metatarsal and phalanx fractures were treated. The shortest injury-treatment interval was reported in patients with a proximal femoral fracture and an ankle fracture, and relatively the lowest number of treated patients in the first hours after the injury was reported among patients with metatarsal and toe fractures. When evaluating the 24hour injury-treatment time interval, this difference was significant only when comparing proximal femoral fractures and metatarsal and phalanx fractures (p < 0.001), while when comparing proximal femoral fractures and ankle fractures the difference was not significant (p = 0.283). DISCUSSION There are not many studies of other authors focused on monitoring the injury-treatment time interval in the most frequent limb bone fractures. They also confirm that the treatment is sought out most quickly by patients with fractures that make walking or self-care impossible. CONCLUSIONS The results of the study confirmed that the fastest treatment was requested in patients with fractures which made the selfcare (distal radius) or walking (proximal femur, ankle) impossible; less painful fractures (metacarpal, phalanx fractures) and fractures that do not compromise walking (metatarsal fractures) were treated in the first 24 hours after the injury significantly less frequently. The patients with ankle fractures sought out treatment the most quickly compared to the patients with other fractures; it concerned largely occupational or sports injuries sustained by young men who were brought for treatment immediately after the injury, directly from their workplace or sports ground. The treatment of osteoporotic fractures (proximal humerus, distal radius, proximal femur) was spread over the first 6 hours due to the lack of independence of elderly patients after sustaining a fall at home; in majority of them transport to treatment was arranged for by relatives or neighbours only with a certain delay, once they became aware of their injury. Key words: fracture epidemiology, limb bone fractures, trauma-treatment time interval.