K-wire Osteosynthesis of the Hand in the Outpatient Clinic: Assessment of the Infectious Risks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The aim of this project is to determine whether performing K-wire osteosynthesis of the hand in an outpatient clinic generates a higher rate of infections compared with those occurring after performing the same technique in an operating room. Methods: We reviewed the electronic medical charts of 172 patients who underwent percutaneous pinning of the hand in our center's outpatient clinic during 2021 and 2022. Relevant data, including patient risk factors (eg, diabetes), procedural management (eg, number of days before pin removal), and outcomes were collected and analyzed. These results were then compared with infection rates reported in the current scientific literature for the same procedure performed in operating rooms. Results: Of the 172 patients studied, 12 infections occurred (7.0%), including 9 superficial infections (5.2%), such as cellulitis, and 3 deep infections (1.7%), such as osteomyelitis. Infectious complications were positively correlated with risk factors such as diabetes and index finger injuries. Conclusions: Literature review indicates that infection rates for K-wire osteosynthesis in an operating room range from 2.0% to 21.4%, with an average risk of around 8.0%. The incidence of deep infections is estimated at 2.0%. Therefore, we conclude that infection rates for percutaneous pinning of the hand performed in outpatient clinics are comparable to those performed in operating rooms.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".