Clinical, Radiographic, and Patient-Perceived Outcome After Radial Hemi-Wrist Arthroplasty With a New Implant: 20 Cases With 5-Year Follow-up
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Distal component loosening is a common mode of failure in total wrist arthroplasty (TWA). A radial hemi-wrist arthroplasty (RHWA) has the potential to avoid problems related to the distal component in TWA. The aim of this study is to investigate clinical outcomes following surgical treatment with a new RHWA design. METHODS: In this pilot study of 20 consecutive RHWAs, patients were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively for range of motion, grip strength, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores, and functional scoring using Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH), and Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Radiographs were analyzed at 12 months and 5 years (mean, 5.1 years) postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 46 secondary surgeries were undertaken in 16 wrists, including 7 revisions. Another 6 patients are waiting for revision to radiocarpal arthrodesis. In non-revised patients, the DASH and PRWE scores improved, and wrist range of motion remained largely unchanged except for wrist flexion, which decreased. The VAS pain score during activity was reduced, and hand grip strength remained largely unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: The new implant resulted in improved functional scoring and improved VAS pain scores in non-revised patients, but many cases needed secondary surgery due to persistent pain. The high revision rate is a major concern, and further use of the implant in its current form cannot be recommended.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it