Risk Factors for Corrective Septorhinoplasty Associated With Initial Treatment of Isolated Nasal Fracture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Initial treatment of nasal fractures can result in long-standing cosmetic or functional defects, but the risk factors for subsequent septorhinoplasty have not been explored. OBJECTIVE: To assess the risk factors for septorhinoplasty after the initial treatment of isolated nasal fracture. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective population-based analysis of US patients diagnosed with nasal fracture between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2015, used insurance claims data from the Commercial and Medicare Supplemental categories of the Truven Health MarketScan database. Of the 340 715 patients diagnosed with nasal fracture, 78 474 were included in the final study cohort, excluding those who did not meet enrollment criteria or were diagnosed with concomitant facial fracture. Patients were classified into 1 of 4 groups according to the type and timing of treatment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Septorhinoplasty between 6 and 24 months after nasal fracture diagnosis. Explanatory variables included initial fracture treatment, demographics, comorbidities, and diagnoses associated with a preexisting nasal obstruction or defect. RESULTS: Most of the 78 474 patients were under 65 years of age (66 770 [85.1%]) and male (41 997 [53.5%]) and lived in an urban area (67 938 [86.6%]). Among patients with no preexisting diagnosis of nasal obstruction or defect, open treatment within 3 weeks (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.76; 95% CI, 1.33-2.32) of nasal fracture and between 3 weeks and 6 months (aOR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.14-2.04) after fracture were associated with increased risk of subsequent septorhinoplasty. In patients with a diagnosis of preexisting nasal obstruction or defect, observation (aOR, 3.56; 95% CI, 2.80-4.53), closed reduction treatment (aOR, 3.10; 95% CI, 1.93-4.96), and open treatment within 3 weeks (aOR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.48-2.77) of fracture were all associated with increased risk of subsequent septorhinoplasty, with observation having the highest risk. Patients were also more likely to undergo subsequent septorhinoplasty if they were younger than 65 years, with the greatest risk seen in patients 18 to 34 years of age (aOR, 6.02; 95% CI, 4.26-8.50), lived in an urban area (aOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.01-1.44), or had a history of anxiety (aOR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.18-1.78), but less likely if they were male (aOR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.73-0.91). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study suggests that a preexisting diagnosis of nasal obstruction or defect and other aspects of a patient's history are factors to consider when assessing the likelihood of surgical revision of initial treatment of nasal fracture. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".