Joint Preservation of the Wrist Using Articulated Distraction Arthroplasty: A Case Report of a Novel Technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Distraction arthroplasty of the ankle, elbow, and hip has become widely accepted and used within the orthopaedic community with excellent initial results which appear sustained. To date it has not been applied to the wrist in the same manner. A novel technique, drawn upon past success of articulated ankle distraction and static wrist distraction, was devised and evaluated by application of articulated wrist distraction performed over a 12-week period in a patient with poor functional outcome following limited wrist fusion. Posttreatment results showed improvement in range of motion (100-degree arc), subjective pain, and functional outcome measures (DASH 21.7, Mayo Wrist Score 80) comparable or better than either limited wrist fusion or proximal row carpectomy. Articulated wrist distraction initially appears to be a promising therapeutic option for the management of the stiff and painful wrist to maintain maximal function for which formal wrist arthrodesis may be the only alternative.
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) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".