MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115711021 · doi:10.48620/93110

Patient Perspectives After Trapeziectomy Versus Carpometacarpal Prosthesis: A Qualitative Thematic Analysis of Ten Bilateral Cases.

2025· article· en· W7115711021 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Access CRIS of the University of Bern · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsHand and Upper Limb Clinic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisProsthesisRehabilitationThumbQualitative researchPsychosocialPatient satisfactionArthritis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Carpometacarpal (CMC-I) arthritis is a frequent and disabling condition. Standard surgical options include trapeziectomy and prosthetic arthroplasty. While quantitative outcomes have been widely studied, little is known about patient perspectives regarding function, aesthetics, and rehabilitation. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with ten patients who had undergone trapeziectomy on one side and prosthesis implantation on the contralateral side. Interviews were performed ≥6 months postoperatively, audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed thematically following Braun and Clarke's framework. Researcher triangulation and member checking were applied to enhance trustworthiness. Results: Four overarching themes were identified. (1) Strength: Most patients reported greater strength and endurance on the prosthetic side, though both hands were generally adequate for daily activities. (2) Rehabilitation: Recovery after prosthesis implantation was described as markedly faster and less burdensome, with reduced need for therapy compared to trapeziectomy. (3) Aesthetics: Trapeziectomy was often associated with dissatisfaction due to thumb shortening and collapse, while prostheses were perceived as restoring a more natural appearance. (4) Surgical preference: When asked which procedure they would hypothetically choose again, all participants favored prosthesis implantation, citing superior function, faster recovery, and more favorable aesthetics. Conclusions: Patients who experienced both procedures consistently preferred prosthesis implantation. Their narratives highlight dimensions beyond standard clinical scores, including rehabilitation burden, appearance, and psychosocial impact. Incorporating patient-reported outcomes into surgical counseling is essential to align treatment of CMC-I arthritis with patient priorities and to support shared 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Access CRIS of the University of BernSame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207