Proximal Screw Configuration Alters Peak Plate Strain Without Changing Construct Stiffness in Comminuted Supracondylar Femur Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Assess the effect of proximal screw configuration on the strain in lateral plating of a simulated comminuted supracondylar femur fracture. METHODS: Fractures were simulated in 12 synthetic femurs by removing a 200-mm section of bone, located 60 mm from the intercondylar fossa and repaired using a 16-hole locked lateral plate instrumented with 8 uniaxial strain gauges. Three proximal screw type configurations were evaluated: (1) 4 nonlocking screws, (2) 4 locking screws, and (3) a hybrid configuration of 2 nonlocking screws flanked by a locking screw at each end of the proximal fragment. Each screw type was compared for 2 working lengths (∼90 and 160 mm). The longer working length was created by removing the proximal screw closest to the fracture gap. Testing consisted of a vertical load (500 N) applied to the head of femur. Configurations were compared using plate strain, construct stiffness, and fracture gap displacement as outcome measures. RESULTS: Plate strain immediately above the fracture gap was reduced with nonlocking screws compared with the other screw types. Plate strains were reduced around the fracture gap with the longer working length but increased for the nonlocking construct at the location of the removed screw. Construct stiffness was not altered by screw type or working length. An increase in fracture gap displacement was only evident in shear translation with the longer working length. CONCLUSIONS: Plate strain in lateral plating of supracondylar femur fractures is decreased using nonlocking screws proximal to the fracture. Increasing the working length reduces plate strains over the working length yet should be cautioned because of increased interfragmentary shear motion.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".