Wrist Injuries in Climbers
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Acute and chronic injuries to the wrist are among the most common sport-related complaints of climbing athletes but have not been extensively evaluated in this population. Therefore, it is important to categorize climbing injuries to the wrist, analyze risk factors, and assess treatment outcomes. Purpose: To evaluate the distribution, outcomes, and influencing factors of wrist injuries in climbers. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Climbing athletes with wrist injuries who presented to our specialized sports medical center over the course of 4 years (2017-2020) were selected. All had prospectively completed questionnaires including their climbing-specific background (years of training, climbing level, training methods, etc). Injuries were analyzed (International Climbing and Mountaineering Federation [UIAA] grade and diagnosis), and treatment methods and outcomes were retrospectively assessed with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Parameters included the climbing score, visual analog scale for pain score, Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) score, and shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) score including the sport component (DASH–Sport) score before and after treatment as well as time to return to climbing. Results: A total of 69 patients (25 female, 44 male) with 78 wrist injuries were identified and analyzed. Of these, 7 injuries were bilateral, occurring at the same time, and 2 injuries were independent reinjuries to either the same or the contralateral side. In addition, 24 injuries (30.8%) were acute, while 54 (69.2%) were chronic. Overall, 2 injuries had a UIAA grade of 3; all others had a UIAA grade of 2. The most frequent injuries were synovitis of the ulnocarpal recess, ulnar impaction, bone marrow edema of the lunate, wrist sprains (joint capsular pain with stress, with no pathological finding on magnetic resonance imaging), and wrist ganglion cysts. Nonoperative treatment was performed for 61 of the injuries, while 17 were treated surgically. In 51 cases (65.4%), injuries healed without consequences; in 27 cases (34.6%), discomfort remained. The visual analog scale pain score decreased from 4.8 ± 1.9 before treatment to 0.7 ± 1.0 after treatment ( P < .001), the PRWE score decreased from 53.6 ± 24.9 to 10.3 ± 13.1 ( P < .001), the QuickDASH score improved from 53.0 ± 16.6 to 20.0 ± 20.2 ( P < .001), and the DASH–Sport score improved from 82.0 ± 16.1 to 38.1 ± 23.5 ( P < .001). The climbing score improved from 2.5 ± 1.1 to 4.3 ± 1.0 points ( P < .001). The patient-reported number of days with pain was negatively correlated with changes in the PRWE score ( r = −0.351; P < .001), QuickDASH score ( r = −0.316; P = .007), and climbing score ( r = −0.264; P = .025) as well as the number of days without climbing ( r = −0.266; P = .025). The number of days without climbing was positively correlated with changes in the PRWE score ( r = 0.369; P < .001). Conclusion: Wrist injuries in climbers constituted a diverse set of diagnoses. Ulnar-sided injuries were most common, and many patients had >1 diagnosis. Outcomes for all treatment methods (surgery and nonoperative care) were favorable, but approximately one-third of climbers had persistent wrist discomfort after treatment, underscoring the need for accurate diagnoses and acute and expert care.
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 | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,001 |
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 ».