MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069438992 · doi:10.1007/s11999-014-3541-x

Is ORIF Superior to Nonoperative Treatment in Isolated Displaced Partial Articular Fractures of the Radial Head?

2014· article· en· W2069438992 on OpenAlexaff
Albert Yoon, Graham J.W. King, Ruby Grewal

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElbow and Forearm Trauma Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineElbowRadial head fractureSurgeryGrip strengthInternal fixationRadiographyReduction (mathematics)Displacement (psychology)Range of motionRadial head

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: While good results have been reported with both nonoperative and operative treatment of isolated displaced partial radial head fractures, there remains considerable disagreement about the role of surgery in the management of these injuries. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We (1) compared isolated displaced partial articular radial head fractures treated nonoperatively with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) in terms of validated outcomes scores, ROM, and strength; (2) assessed whether there were any predictor variables for outcomes; and (3) compared complications between groups. METHODS: We retrospectively compared patients with isolated partial articular radial head fractures displaced greater than 2 mm but less than 5 mm who received either nonoperative treatment (30 patients) or ORIF (30 patients). We reviewed the nonoperative and ORIF groups at a mean of 3 and 4.5 years, respectively. The nonoperative and ORIF groups were similar except for age (51 ± 17 years versus 39 ± 10 years, respectively) and fracture displacement (2.3 ± 0.3 mm versus 2.8 ± 0.6 mm, respectively). As there were no definitive guidelines on which treatment represented best management, treatment type was decided by the attending surgeon in conjunction with the patient on a case-by-case basis. Patients were evaluated using the Patient-rated Elbow Evaluation (PREE) (primary outcome measure), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), QuickDASH, SF-12, clinical examination, and radiographic evaluation (14 and 28 in the nonoperative and ORIF groups, respectively). Elbow ROM was assessed with a goniometer and hand grip strength with calibrated strength testing. We assessed possible predictive variables (age, displacement, energy of injury) for clinical outcome scores and recorded complications. RESULTS: PREE scores were not different between groups, but the MEPS favored the nonoperative group (93 versus 86; p = 0.012). ROM and grip strength were similar between groups. Younger age was associated with worse outcome, but displacement and energy were not. More complications occurred in the ORIF group (eight cases of mild heterotopic ossification, two cases of hardware failure) than in the nonoperative group (one case of mild heterotopic ossification, one case of complex regional pain syndrome). CONCLUSIONS: No clinical benefit with ORIF could be found compared to nonoperative management of isolated partial articular radial head fractures with displacement of greater than 2 mm but less than 5 mm at short-term followup. A well-designed randomized trial and followup at longer term are required to provide better information about how to treat these common fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.372 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Orthopaedics and Related ResearchSame topicElbow and Forearm Trauma TreatmentFrench-language works237,207