Functional Outcome and Quality of Life After Surgical Fixation of Tibial Plateau Fracture in a Tertiary Care Center of Nepal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionFunctional outcome and quality of life (QoL) of patients will change following tibial plateau fracture fixation. There are limited studies evaluating functional and radiological outcomes following tibial plateau fixation in Nepal, and none has evaluated QoL. We aim to evaluate functional outcome and QoL in patients with tibial plateau fracture with a follow up period of more than two years. MethodsThis was a cross sectional, observational study done at Dhulikhel Hospital, from August 2021 to January 2022. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) functional outcome and World Health Organization QoL-8 (WHOQoL-8) questionnaire were filled by patients operated for tibial plateau fracture from 2011 to 2019. Compound fractures, untraceable patients, and those managed with casts were excluded from the study. ResultsThere were 121 patients (male: female = 2.3:1) with a mean age of 37.1 years. Road traffic accidents (44.6%) were the most common mode of injury, and Schatzker type IV (30.6%) was the most common type of fracture. The average WOMAC score was 13.05±12.1 and the average WHOQoL-8 score was 30.24±4.1. The average WOMAC score in high-energy and low energy trauma patients were 17.07±12.29 and 8.21±10 respectively. The average WHOQoL-8 in high energy and low energytrauma patients were 29.28±3.59 and 31.38±4.38 respectively. ConclusionsSurgical reduction and stable internal fixation of tibial plateau fractures with long term follow up has a good functional outcome and quality of life. High energy trauma is associated with poor functional outcome and quality of life.
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 | 0.002 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".