MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of Outcomes in Patients Following Surgical Treatment of Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome in the Leg

2000· article· en· W2006046922 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Sport Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMuscle and Compartmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFasciotomyCompartment (ship)DemographicsRetrospective cohort studyPatient satisfactionVisual analogue scaleSurgeryPhysical therapyReferralInternal medicineAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes in patients who had a fasciotomy performed on their leg(s) for chronic exertional compartment syndrome (CECS). DESIGN: A retrospective descriptive cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary care sport medicine referral practice. PATIENTS: A consecutive series of 62 patients surgically treated for CECS from January 1991 to December 1997. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A questionnaire was designed and developed to assess pain (using a 100 mm visual analogue scale), level of improvement, level of maximum activity, satisfaction level, and the occurrence of reoperations. RESULTS: Fifty patients had anterior/lateral compartment involvement, 8 patients had deep posterior compartment involvement, and 4 patients had anterior/lateral/deep posterior compartment involvement. The demographics of the 39 respondents and 23 nonrespondents were similar. The mean percent pain relief of respondents was 68% (95% CI [confidence interval] = 54% to 82%). There was no relationship between percent pain relief and the documented immediate post exercise compartment pressures. A clinically significant improvement was reported by 26 of 32 (81%) anterior/lateral compartment patients and 3 of 6 (50%) patients with deep posterior compartment involvement. Patient level of activity after fasciotomy was classified as equal to or higher than before the operation with a lesser degree of pain by 28 of 36 (78%) patients, while 8 of 36 (22%) patients reported lower activity levels than before the operation. Of the patients reporting lower activity, seven were due to exercise related pain in the post operative leg(s) and one was due to lifestyle changes. Thirty of 38 patients (79%) were satisfied with the outcome of the operation. Four of 62 patients (6%) failed the initial surgical procedure and required revision surgery for exercise-induced pain. In addition, one of these individuals also had a sympathectomy and another had a neurolysis performed at the time of revision surgery. Three of the 62 (5%) patients had subsequent operations for exercise-induced pain on different compartments than the initial surgical procedure. One individual had an unsuccessful operative repair of a posttraumatic neuroma. Postoperative complications were reported by 5 of 39 (13%) patients in the additional comments section of the questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients surgically treated for CECS experience a high level of pain relief and are satisfied with the results of their operation. The level of pain relief experienced by patients is not related to the magnitude of the immediate post exercise compartment pressures. Despite the possibility that some patients have less favorable outcomes, experience complications, or need subsequent operations, fasciotomy is recommended for patients with CECS as there is no other treatment for this condition.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it