Outcomes and Complications of Ulnar Shortening Osteotomy: An Institutional Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ulnar impaction syndrome (UIS) is a common cause of ulnar wrist pain. Patients may be candidates for surgical intervention if nonoperative options are ineffective. At our institution, ulnar shortening osteotomy is the preferred procedure to manage this disorder. The purpose of this study was to present patient reported outcomes and complication rates of ulnar shortening osteotomy (USO) at mid-term follow-up. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 72 patients (75 wrists) obtained from our institutional database was performed. At a mean 32 months postoperatively, telephone interviews (n = 53) were performed for all patients who were available for follow-up. The patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE), a validated outcome tool, was completed and complications were reviewed. RESULTS: Patient-rated outcomes were favorable; however, complications were frequent and included: delayed union (10/75, 13.3 %), nonunion (6/75, 8 %), and complex regional pain syndrome (5/75, 6.7 %). Ten patients (13.3 %) required revision surgery. Thirty-four patients (45.3 %) required hardware removal with 4/30 (11.4 %) of these patients experiencing refracture. Smokers (mean PRWE 67.1) and patients with workers' compensation claims (mean PRWE 64.9) reported higher residual pain and disability than their counterparts (mean PRWE 28.0; 25.2). CONCLUSIONS: General outcome measures were favorable. Smokers and patients with workers' compensation claims experienced significantly poorer outcomes. However, the incidence of nonunion and delayed union was higher than most reports in the literature. Furthermore, we demonstrated a high refracture rate (11.4 %) following removal of hardware.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".