Progression of surgical scars in the hand and wrist over time: A peak in scar-related symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have noted a peak in induration and tenderness around scars with accompanying symptoms 6-8 weeks after most hand operations. The purpose of this study was to characterise this phenomenon. All consecutive patients treated for fractures of the distal radius through a volar scar were prospectively enrolled. Exclusion criteria included: previous injuries of that wrist, no volar scar, open fractures with considerable soft tissue injury, or injuries to the nerve or vessel, or all three. Patients were evaluated every other week for three months after the operation for the following: tightness, the Vancouver scale, oedema, and range of movement in the wrist. Non-linear mixed effects models were used for analysis. Eighteen patients were evaluated. The primary outcomes included a reduction in pliability from 2.1 (0.6) to 0.9 (0.5), and subjective tightness that decreased from 3.6 (1.8) to 1.5 (2.6). Both pliability and subjective tightness showed a parabolic pattern over time, with a peak at 5.10 (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.36 to 5.84) weeks and 4.12 (2.19 to 6.05) weeks, respectively. Mean (SD) active extension increased from 22.5 (11.4)(o) at 2 weeks to 45.5 (13.4)(o) at 12 weeks. Flexion increased from 19.1 (10.2)(o) to 33.0 (14.7)(o). Oedema decreased from 19.4 (2.1) to 17.3 (1.3) cm. The Vancouver scale decreased from 6.0 (1.9) to 3.4 (1.9), and these variables showed a consistent pattern of change over time. Our results support the existence of a peak in scar symptoms, illustrated by a reduction in pliability and an increase in subjective tightness about 4-5 weeks after the operation. Anticipating this healing pattern can aid in tailoring postoperative management of the scar.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".