99 Type III and V AC joint dislocation show no difference in functional outcome and risk of surgery at 1-year follow-up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Acromioclavicular(AC) joint dislocations are common injuries, but the need for surgery is debated. The objective of the study was to evaluate the result after acute Rockwood type III and V AC joint dislocations managed non-surgically with the option of delayed surgical intervention. Materials and Methods This was a prospective cohort study with clinical, radiological and patient-reported outcome assessment at baseline and 6w, 3m, 6m and 1y after acute AC joint dislocation. Inclusion criteria were patients aged 18–60 with acute AC joint dislocation and >50% superior displacement of the clavicle. All patients were treated non-surgically with 3 months of home-based training and with the option of delayed surgical intervention. At baseline, patients were graded as Rockwood type III or V based on the coracoclavicular difference. The primary outcome was the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI). Secondary outcome was surgery yes/no. Results Ninety-five patients, male:female ratio 9.6:1, mean age 39.5 (range 18–59), were included. 57 patients were Rockwood type III and 38 patients were type V. There were no statistically significant differences in WOSI between patients with type III and V injuries at any time-point. Nine patients (9.5%) were referred for surgery at an average of 189 days (range 75–358) after the injury; 7 type III and 2 type V (p=0.31). Patients eventually referred for surgery had significantly worse WOSI at 6w, 3m and 6m. Conclusion Non-surgical management of Rockwood type III and V injuries shows similar and overall satisfactory results with 91% recovering well without the need of surgery.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".