Functional outcomes following ankle arthrodesis in males with haemophilia: analyses using the <scp>CDC</scp>'s Universal Data Collection surveillance project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In persons with haemophilia (PWH), repeated ankle haemarthroses lead to pain, loss of joint range of motion (ROM), and limitations in activity and participation in society. PWH are offered ankle arthrodesis (AA) to eliminate pain. In our experience, PWH are hesitant to proceed to AA due to concerns regarding gait anomalies, functional decline and complete loss of ROM. The aim of this study was to report outcomes in ROM, assistive device (AD)/wheelchair use, activity scale and work/school absenteeism for participants in the CDC's Universal Data Collection surveillance project (UDC) pre- and post- AA. Males with haemophilia enrolled in the UDC with first report of AA (1998-2010) were selected. Descriptive statistics were calculated using data from the annual study visit pre-AA and the follow-up visit (~12-24 months) post-AA. The 68 subjects who fulfilled the criteria were: mean age 36.9 years (SD = 12.9); 85.3% white; 85.3% haemophilia A; 72% severe, 20.6% moderate; and 10.3% with inhibitor once during the study period. Mean loss in total arc of ankle motion was 17.02° (SD = 21.8, P ≤ 0.01) pre- compared to post-AA. For 61.8%, there was no change in use of AD for ambulation/mobility. For 85.3%, there was no change in use of a wheelchair. On a self-reported activity scale, 11.8% improved, 8.8% worsened and 79.4% did not change. Work/school absenteeism averaged 2.7 (SD = 6.4) pre- and 1.5 (SD = 6.4, P = 0.26) days per year post-AA. While ankle ROM was significantly reduced post-AA, for most subjects, there was no change in use of AD/wheelchair for ambulation/mobility. Physical activity was maintained and work/school absenteeism remained stable.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".