A POPULATION REVIEW OF 5207 CALCANEOUS FRACTURES: CURRENT PRACTICE AND TREATMENT COMPLICATIONS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
5207 patients treated for a calcaneous fracture in Ontario between 1993–1999 were identified from population datasets and were reviewed to evaluate regional practice variation and complication rates for operatively and non-operatively managed calcaneous fractures. There was considerable geographic variation in treatment. Individuals in some parts of Ontario were almost eight times more likely to receive operative treatment than others. The majority of calcaneous fractures in Ontario are treated non-operatively, however the large observed practice variation suggests that there is disagreement among treating clinicians. Primary subtalar fusion has a high risk of post-operative infection and should therefore be considered very cautiously. The purpose of this study was to evaluate regional practice variation and complication rates for operatively and non-operatively managed calcaneous fractures. The majority of calcaneous fractures in Ontario are treated non-operatively, however the large observed practice variation suggests that there is disagreement among treating clinicians. Primary subtalar fusion has a high risk of post-operative infection and should therefore be considered very cautiously. Given the observed regional variation in management of calcaneous fractures more work needs to be done to address this issue. 5207 fractures of the calcaneous in Ontario between 1993–1999were identified from population datasets. Regional variations in treatment and complication rates were computed. Multiple linear regression was used to identify factors associated with complications. There was considerable geographic variation in treatment. Individuals in some parts of Ontario were almost eight times more likely to receive operative treatment than others. General surgeons or general practitioners definitively treated 30% of patients (almost all closed). Overall rate of complications was low, however there was a 13.4 percent infection rate following immediate subtalar fusion. Infection was 5.3% following ORIF and 0.6% following closed treatment. Infection risk was increased in multiple trauma patients and those with open fractures. Subsequent subtalar fusion rates (within the study period) were higher in multiple trauma patients, but were not associated with treatment (open or closed). Amputation was 22.5 times more likely following open calcaneous fractures but the overall amputation rate was only 0.17%. No relationship between surgeon experience and the rate of complications following operative treatment was identified.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,018 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».