MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400643183 · doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2024.07.019

Non-operative management of metacarpal II-IV fractures: A retrospective study from a tertiary hand unit

2024· article· en· W4400643183 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Turňa, Immy Stringer, Barbara Jemec, Meera Anadkat, Chinedum Arize, Dariush Nikkhah

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plastic Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTertiary careRetrospective cohort studyMedicineMetacarpal bonesUnit (ring theory)DentistrySurgeryOrthodonticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metacarpal fractures produce significant hand disability, and non-operative management of these fractures can produce satisfactory functional outcomes with few complications. However, most studies assessing non-operative outcomes of metacarpal fractures revolves around metacarpals I and V, which possess different anatomy. Therefore, further investigation into outcomes after non-operative treatment of metacarpals II-IV is required to inform management decisions and allow modification of the rehabilitation protocols to specific fracture patterns. All records for 76 non-operative patients presenting with fractures of metacarpals II-IV to our tertiary centre in the year 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were treated with thermoplastic splinting or fibreglass casting with a rehabilitative exercise programme. Range of motion (ROM) of the Metacarpophalangeal (MCPJ), Proximal Interphalangeal (PIPJ), and Distal Interphalangeal joints (DIPJ), return to work time, and complications were assessed at 12 weeks post-treatment. Mean return to work time was 5.4 weeks, and patients did not report any serious adverse events; the main complication reported was tenderness on palpation (20%). The MCPJ exhibited the poorest ROM (9° flexion reduction relative to the healthy hand). Metacarpal II fractures were associated with significantly worse MCPJ flexion than metacarpal III (p = 0.022) and metacarpal IV (p = 0.049) fractures. Fractures of the metacarpal base were associated with superior MCPJ flexion (p = 0.004) but longer return to work time (p = 0.042) than head fractures. Spiral fractures were associated with shorter return to work time (p = 0.043) and superior ROM results (p = 0.041). In conclusion, outcomes of the non-operative treatment of metacarpal II-IV fractures are highly dependent on the location and pattern of the fracture, and this should be considered during clinical decision making.

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)0.001
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 score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Plastic Reconstructive & Aesthetic SurgerySame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207