The outcome of antegrade intramedullary nail fixation of traumatic diaphyseal fractures of the femur in a tertiary care trauma center in Sri Lanka
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: We evaluated the outcome, functional recovery, and complications of intramedullary nailing for fractures of the femoral shaft fractures. Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted at the National Hospital of Sri Lanka. Patients with isolated femoral shaft fractures undergoing intramedullary nailing were followed up prospectively to assess the factors associated with better functional recovery (measured by Harris Hip Score (HHS) and Western Ontario and McMaster University osteoarthritis index (WOMAC)). Results: Of 46 patients, the median age was 40(IQR=26-59) years. Majority had simple (n=34, 73.9%), closed (n=39,84.8%) fractures while seven (15.2%) had Gustilo Type I open fractures. Surgery was performed at a median of 9.5(IQR=6-14) days after the injury. Approximately two-thirds of the patients required reamed nailing (n=30, 65.2%). Three patients developed surgical site infections. X-rays obtained at four months demonstrated features of non-union in 13(28.3%). Leg length discrepancy (LLD) was present in 16(34.8%), and rotational deformity in one patient. Full and partial weight-bearing at six weeks was achieved in six and 23 patients respectively while 17 patients were unable to bear weight. The median HHS and WOMAC at four months were 66.5 and 36, respectively. Patients with proximal or distal diaphyseal fractures, female patients and those with full weight-bearing six weeks showed the best WOMAC index. Conclusion: Proximal or distal diaphyseal fractures, female sex and ability to bear weight at six weeks post-surgery were associated with better functional outcomes at four months postoperatively. Surgeons should be mindful of the limitations of resource- poor settings which could affect the surgical outcomes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".