A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMISED CONTROL TRIAL COMPARING THE LONG GAMMA NAIL WITH THE SLIDING HIP SCREW FOR THE TREATMENT OF AO/OTA 31 A2 FRACTURES OF THE PROXIMAL FEMUR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Controversy exists whether to treat unstable pertrochanteric hip fractures with either intra-medullary or extra-medullary devices. A prospective randomised control trial was performed to compare the outcome of unstable pertrochanteric hip fractures stabilised with either a sliding hip screw or long Gamma Nail. The hypothesis was that there is no difference in outcome between the two modes of treatment. Over a four year period, 210 patients presenting with an unstable pertrochanteric hip fracture (AO/OTA 31 A2) were recruited into the study. Eligible patients were randomised on admission to either long Gamma Nail or sliding hip screw. Follow-up was arranged for three, six, and twelve months. Primary outcome measures were implant failure or ‘cut-out’. Secondary measures included mortality, length of hospital stay, transfusion rate, change in mobility and residence, and EuroQol outcome score. Five patients required revision surgery for implant cut-out (2.5%), of which three were long Gamma Nails and two were sliding hip screws (no significant difference). There were no incidences of implant failure or deep infection. Tip apex distance was found to correlate with implant cut-out. There was no statistically significant difference in either the EuroQol outcome scores or mortality rates between the two groups when corrected for mini mental score. There was no difference in transfusion rates, length of hospital stay, and change in mobility or residence. There was a clear cost difference between the implants. The sliding hip screw remains the gold standard in the treatment of unstable pertrochanteric fractures of the proximal femur.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".