Outcome of Plate Fixation of Olecranon Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the functional outcome of plate fixation for displaced olecranon fractures, both simple and comminuted. DESIGN: Retrospective patient, chart, and radiographic review. SETTING: Academic teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Twenty-five patients who underwent plate fixation of displaced olecranon fractures by two surgeons were independently reviewed at an average follow-up of thirty-four months (range, 15-69 months). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Physical capability was assessed by measuring range of motion and isometric elbow strength. Patient-rated outcomes were evaluated using the SF-36, DASH, Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI), and visual analogue scales for patient satisfaction and pain. Radiographs were evaluated preoperatively, postoperatively, and at the time of final review. RESULTS: The average patient age was fifty-four years (range, 14-81 years). The Mayo classification of fractures was fourteen Type II and eleven Type III. An adequate reduction was maintained in all elbows until union. Physical capability measures indicated nonsignificant side-to-side differences in motion or strength, except for supination motion, which was reduced in the injured arm (p = 0.003). The MEPI-rated outcome was twenty-two excellent or good. Patient satisfaction was high (9.7/10), with a low pain rating (1/10). The mean DASH score was consistent with almost normal upper extremity function. The SF-36 showed no difference in physical health as compared with the average American population. Twenty percent of patients required plate removal because of prominence of the internal fixation. The outcome was not influenced by fracture pattern. CONCLUSION: Plate fixation is an effective treatment option for displaced olecranon fractures with a good functional outcome and a low incidence of complications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".