Functional Outcome after the Hoffer Procedure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with obstetrical brachial plexus injury often develop an internal rotation and adduction contracture about the shoulder as a secondary deformity, resulting in an inability to externally rotate and abduct the shoulder. The Hoffer procedure is evaluated for its potential benefit in improving shoulder abduction and external rotation and its impact on activities of daily living. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients treated in brachial plexus injury clinic who underwent tendon transfer procedures about the shoulder. Preoperative and postoperative active movement and active range of motion were measured and recorded using the Mallet scale and the Active Movement Scale. RESULTS: Twenty patients were included in the study. Average age at time of surgery was 6.35 years. Thirteen patients had primary brachial plexus reconstructive surgery and four patients had concomitant wrist extension tendon transfer procedures. All patients had full passive range of motion preoperatively. The average follow-up period was 25.45 months. Average differences in pre-Hoffer and post-Hoffer Mallet scale scores are as follows: active abduction, 1.20; external rotation, 1.35; hand-to-neck, 1.25; hand-to-back, 0.75; hand-to-mouth, 0.65; and aggregate score, 5.20 (p<0.001 for all). Average differences in relevant pre-Hoffer and post-Hoffer Active Movement Scale scores are as follows: shoulder abduction, 2.10; shoulder external rotation, 4.25; and shoulder internal rotation, -0.80. All patients maintained full range of motion passively; thus, no functional loss was experienced. These results showed very high statistical significance (p<0.001 for all) and clinical significance. Younger patients (≤6 years) and those with better preoperative shoulder flexion and shoulder internal rotation yielded better postoperative results. CONCLUSIONS: The Hoffer procedure provides clinically and statistically significant improvement in external rotation and abduction while preserving functional internal rotation range in the child with obstetrical brachial plexus palsy and secondary shoulder deformity. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".