Comparative Study of Peroneal Tenosynovitis as the Complication of Intraarticular Calcaneal Fracture in Surgically and Non-Surgically Treated Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Calcaneus has the most fracture prevalence among tarsal bones. About 3/4 of calcaneal fractures are intra-articular fractures with displacement. The majority of calcaneal fractures occur in 21 - 35 year old young men, and that are mostly active people, these fractures cause complete disability for 15 months. Moreover, inappropriate treatment leads to lots of social and economical damages. OBJECTIVES: In this study we compared the incidence and the severity of peroneal tenosynovitis as a complication of non-operative and operative treatment of intra-articular calcaneal fractures. In this study, some other complications of this fracture were also analyzed and the prevalence of the complication was higher in non-operated patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 140 patients with intra-articular calcaneal fracture were analyzed prospectively. These patients were divided into 2 groups: operated group and non-operated group. RESULTS: In non-operated group (56 patients), 22 patients were complicated by peroneal tenosynovitis. In operated group (84 patients), 8 patients had the same complication. Statistical analysis revealed that the prevalence, and the severity of this complication in the mentioned groups had a meaningful difference. The results in operated group were much better than the non-operated one. CONCLUSIONS: Although some of the orthopedic surgeons are not interested to manage these fractures surgically and most of them treat these cases conservatively (casting, etc.), in most displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures, surgical treatment is the method of choice. Moreover, in non-surgical treatment the prevalence of these complications among the patients is more and as a result, inevitable social, occupational and familial damages occur.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".