Total Hip Arthroplasty is Less Painful at 12 Months Compared with Hemiarthroplasty in Treatment of Displaced Femoral Neck Fracture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The Displaced Femoral (neck fracture) Arthroplasty Consortium for Treatment and Outcomes (DFACTO) study compared total hip arthroplasty (THA) to hemiarthroplasty in the treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures. DESIGN: This study was designed as a prospective, randomized clinical trial. SETTING: The study was conducted in five US academic and private medical centers. PATIENTS: Patients were composed of independent, mentally competent individuals, >50 years old who suffered a displaced femoral neck fracture without existing arthritis at the hip. Forty-one patients were enrolled. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Functional outcomes and quality of life were assessed at 6 and 12 months post-fracture using the SF-36, Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the Harris Hip Score, and the Timed "Up & Go" Test (TUG test). RESULTS: Groups were equivalent at baseline in terms of age, comorbid conditions, and functional status. At 6 months, there were no significant differences between the groups using the outcome measures or overall rates of complications. There was one dislocation in the THA group (5.8% of patients). At 12 months, the THA group reported significantly less pain (53.2 +/- 10.2) than the hemiarthroplasty group (42.4 +/- 11.5) using the SF-36 (p = 0.02). Using the TUG Test, we observed a greater proportion of THA patients remain functionally independent 1 year after surgery compared the hemiarthroplasty group (p = 0.08, controlling for age and sex). CONCLUSIONS: These differences in pain and functional outcomes suggest THA is a viable treatment option for the active elderly displaced femoral neck fracture population.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".