Preexisting Carpal and Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis Has No Impact on Function after Distal Radius Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Functional outcomes of distal radius fractures vary widely regardless of treatment methods. Purpose This study aims to verify whether preexisting carpal and carpometacarpal (CMC) osteoarthritis (OA) will negatively impact wrist functional outcome in patients with distal radius fractures. Patients and Methods A retrospective case–control study was done using a prospective trauma database. Patients were matched 1:1 in two groups based on the presence of wrist or carpal arthritis (OA). The groups were matched for sex, follow-up, and treatment type. Patients were followed up for a minimum of 1 year and functional outcomes were assessed using validated scores. Results A total of 61 patients were included. Mean age was 63 years (range: 20–85) and average follow-up was 26 months. There were 31 patients in the OA+ group and 30 in the OA− group. Forty-one patients were treated surgically and 20 nonoperatively. None of the patients in the OA− developed OA during follow-up. Both groups were comparable for sex, residual deformity, and follow-up. There was no significant difference for the visual analog scale, Short Form-12, Quick Disability Arm Shoulder Hand, and Patient-rated Wrist Evaluation, or for radiographic outcomes. Conclusion Preexisting OA in the wrist or CMC does not seem to impact outcomes of distal radius fractures, regardless of treatment, age, or sex. Although this is a negative study, the results are important to help counsel patients with distal radius fractures. Further work must be done to identify other potential causes for negative outcomes. Level of Evidence Level III, prognostic study.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".