Maxillofacial Fractures: A Three-Year Survey
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Maxillofacial fractures constitute a substantial proportion of trauma globally. The main causes worldwide are road traffic accidents (RTAs), falls, assaults, sports, firearm injuries and industrial trauma. The highest incidence is commonly seen in the young age group with majority being male. The most common site in maxillofacial injuries is the mandible followed by the zygomatic complex, maxilla, and alveolar process. Maxillofacial trauma also poses a significant socioeconomic burden on affected individuals. Hence appropriate treatment and prevention of these morbidities and possible mortality is necessary. This study is therefore aimed at analyzing the prevalence, pattern of presentation of maxillofacial injuries at Lagos State University Teaching Hospital (LASUTH) in Western Nigeria. Methods: A retrospective review of 182 patients diagnosed and treated for maxillofacial injuries at the Oral and Maxillofacial Department of the LASUTH was conducted. Data were obtained from clinical notes and records of radiological findings noting patient ’s age, gender, etiologic factors (RTA, assault, sport, and fall), anatomic site of injury and different definitive treatment modalities. The data were analyzed by SPSS version 20 using various descriptive statistical tools. Mean and standard deviation were calculated for quantitative variable like age while frequency and percentage were calculated for qualitative variables like gender and site of fracture. Results: Majority of patients were male (72.0%) with a male to female ratio of 1:0.4. Most patients were between 31 and 40 (34.1%) years of age. RTA accounting for 73.1% of the injuries was the most common cause for maxillofacial injury followed by assault (19.2%). Majority of injuries due to RTA were of motorcycles accidents (33.6%). The most common sites of fracture out of 226 sites were in the mandible (62.8%, P = 0.003). Among the mandibular fracture sites, 28.2% affected the body of the mandible. Majority (31.9%) of the studied patients presented within 24 h (<= 1 day). Out of the 182 patients, 68.1% were treated by close reduction. Conclusions: RTA represented the major etiological factor of maxillofacial injuries. The mandible remains the most affected bone of the facial skeleton. Closed reduction is the most common approach used for treatment. J Curr Surg. 2019;9(4):51-56 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jcs387
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.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 découle