Muscle Function and Functional Outcome Following Standard Antegrade Reamed Intramedullary Nailing of Isolated Femoral Shaft Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the functional outcomes and long-term effects on muscle strength of femoral shaft fractures treated with intramedullary (IM) antegrade nailing using a standard piriformis start point. DESIGN: Retrospective Outcome Study. SETTING: Tertiary Level Teaching Hospital and Referral Centre for the Province of British Columbia. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-one patients (7 female, 14 male; mean age 34.5 years, range 16-56 years) with isolated femoral shaft fractures who were treated with standard antegrade reamed interlocking IM nailing and who had a minimum 1-year follow-up were identified through the Orthopaedic Trauma Database. All patients had isokinetic muscle testing of their hip abductors, hip extensors, and knee extensors using the KinCom muscle testing machine. Of the patients, 10 underwent formal gait lab analysis. All of the patients answered a questionnaire and completed the Short Form (SF)-36 and Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment outcome measures. INTERVENTION: Antegrade reamed interlocking IM nailing of femoral shaft fractures using a standard trochanteric fossa (also referred to as piriformis fossa) starting point. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Examination of muscle strength, using 2 different objective measures (KinCom and gait analysis). The KinCom muscle testing machine was used for isokinetic muscle testing of hip abductors, hip extensors, and knee extensors. Outcome questionnaires were used to evaluate function (Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment) and general health (SF-36). RESULTS: Isokinetic muscle testing showed a statistically significant lower peak torque generation by the hip abductors (P=0.003) and hip extensors (P=0.046) from the uninjured contralateral side. The gait lab analysis did not show important changes in gait pattern. Scores for the SF-36 were 51.77+/-7.55 and 53.73+/-8.70. Scores for the Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (S-MFA) were 7.74 and 8.66. Both scores did not indicate any significant disability. CONCLUSIONS: Antegrade reamed interlocking IM nailing of femoral shaft fractures using a standard trochanteric fossa starting point is associated with a mild hip abductor muscle-strength deficit. Gait pattern returns to normal following femoral shaft fracture treated with this technique, and functional outcomes are good.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".