MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971279649 · doi:10.1177/0363546519870517

The Effectiveness of a Hinged Elbow Orthosis in Medial Collateral Ligament Injuries: An In Vitro Biomechanical Study

2019· article· en· W2971279649 on OpenAlexafffund
Ranita Harpreet Kaur Manocha, James A. Johnson, Graham J.W. King

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Sports Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElbow and Forearm Trauma Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CareAlberta Bone and Joint Health InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersPhysicians' Services Incorporated Foundation
KeywordsElbowValgusMedicineMedial collateral ligamentForearmRange of motionCadaveric spasmLigamentPhysical medicine and rehabilitationOrthodonticsPhysical therapyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Medial collateral ligament (MCL) injuries are common after elbow trauma and in overhead throwing athletes. A hinged elbow orthosis (HEO) is often used to protect the elbow from valgus stress early after injury and during early return to play. However, there is minimal evidence regarding the efficacy of these orthoses in controlling instability and their influence on long-term clinical outcomes. Purpose: (1) To quantify the effect of an HEO on elbow stability after simulated MCL injury. (2) To determine whether arm position, forearm rotation, and muscle activation influence the effectiveness of an HEO. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Seven cadaveric upper extremity specimens were tested in a custom simulator that enabled elbow motion via computer-controlled actuators and motors attached to relevant tendons. Specimens were examined in 2 arm positions (dependent, valgus) and 2 forearm positions (pronation, supination) during passive and simulated active elbow flexion while unbraced and then while braced with an HEO. Testing was performed in intact elbows and repeated after simulated MCL injury. An electromagnetic tracking device measured valgus angulation as an indicator of elbow stability. Results: When the arm was dependent, the HEO increased valgus angle with the forearm in pronation (+1.0°± 0.2°, P = .003) and supination (+1.5°± 0.0°, P = .006) during active motion. It had no significant effect on elbow stability during passive motion. In the valgus position, the HEO had no effect on elbow stability during passive or active motion in pronation and supination. With the arm in the valgus position with the HEO, muscle activation reduced instability during pronation (–10.3°± 2.5°, P = .006) but not supination ( P = .61). Conclusion: In this in vitro study, this HEO did not enhance mechanical stability when the arm was in the valgus and dependent positions after MCL injury. Clinical Relevance: After MCL injury, an HEO likely does not provide mechanical elbow stability during rehabilitative exercises or when the elbow is subjected to valgus stress such as occurs during throwing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicElbow and Forearm Trauma TreatmentFrench-language works237,207