MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065325758 · doi:10.1007/s11999-014-3518-9

Can We Treat Select Terrible Triad Injuries Nonoperatively?

2014· article· en· W2065325758 on OpenAlex
Kevin Chan, Joy C. MacDermid, Kenneth J. Faber, Graham J.W. King, George S. Athwal

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 Orthopaedics and Related Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElbow and Forearm Trauma Treatment
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineElbowRadial head fractureDashRange of motionSurgeryRadiographyReduction (mathematics)Orthopedic surgeryWristRadial head

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: While the majority of terrible triad elbow injuries (ulnohumeral dislocation with radial head and coronoid fractures) are managed surgically, nonoperative treatment may be appropriate in selected patients, but results with this approach have been limited by very small studies. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We assessed (1) functional outcomes using two validated questionnaires, (2) elbow ROM, strength, and stability, (3) the presence of union and arthritis on radiographs, and (4) complications among a group of patients managed nonoperatively for terrible triad injuries. METHODS: Between 2006 and 2012, we retrospectively identified 12 patients with terrible triad elbow injuries who were treated nonoperatively and met the following criteria: (1) a concentric joint reduction, (2) a radial head fracture that did not cause a mechanical block to rotation, (3) a smaller coronoid fracture (Regan-Morrey Type 1 or 2), and (4) a stable arc of motion to a minimum of 30° of extension to allow active motion within the first 10 days. Eleven patients were available for followup of at least 12 months after the injury (mean, 36 months; range, 12-90 months). Outcome measures included two patient-reported functional outcome measures (DASH, Mayo Elbow Performance Index [MEPI]), a standardized physical examination to record elbow ROM and stability, isometric strength measurements, and radiographic evidence of bony union and elbow arthrosis. Complications were also recorded. RESULTS: At latest followup, mean ± SD DASH score was 8.0 ± 11.0 and mean MEPI score was 94 ± 9. Mean ROM of the affected elbow was 134° ± 5° flexion, 6° ± 8° extension, 87° ± 4° pronation, and 82° ± 10° supination. No instability was detected. Strength assessments demonstrated the following mean percentages of the contralateral, unaffected elbow: flexion 100%, extension 89%, pronation 79%, and supination 89%. Four patients had arthritic changes on radiographs that did not call for treatment as of latest followup. Complications included one patient who underwent surgical stabilization for early recurrent instability and another who underwent arthroscopic débridement for heterotopic bone. CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients, nonoperative treatment of terrible triad injuries is an option that can provide good function and restore stable elbow ROM. However, nonoperative management requires close clinical and radiographic followup to monitor for any delayed elbow subluxation or fracture displacement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.335 · 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