ArticleHand (New York, N.Y.)2011
Retrospective analysis demonstrates no advantage to operative management of distal ulna fractures.
Article in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Attritional Extensor Digiti Minimi Tendon Rupture Associated With a Distal Ulna Fracture.Cureus · 2023Article
- Outcomes of distal ulna locking plate in management of unstable distal ulna fractures: a prospective case series.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Distal ulna fractures in adults-subcapitular, transverse fractures did not benefit from surgical treatment.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Incidence of distal ulna fractures in a Swedish county: 74/100,000 person-years, most of them treated non-operatively.Acta orthopaedica · 2020Article
- Does operative fixation of isolated fractures of ulna shaft results in different outcomes than non-operative management by long arm cast?Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2018Article
- Novel use of a trabecular metal spacer in the treatment of a long-standing ulnar fracture non-union.BMJ case reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIsolated fracture of the distal one third of the ulna (the "nightstick fracture") is a common injury no clear consensus on its optimal management. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of operatively and non-operatively treated distal ulna fractures.
methodsPatients treated over a 5-year period at a level I trauma center for distal ulna fracture were identified and medical records were analyzed. Data were collected on demographics, injury mechanism, fracture pattern, type of treatment, estimated time to osseous healing, and complications. Estimated bony healing time was analyzed with the t test, and treatment types were analyzed with the chi-square test.
resultsForty-seven patients with 48 ulna fractures met inclusion criteria for the study. Mean follow-up was 36 weeks. One third of the group was female and mean patient age was 43 years. Eighteen ulnas were treated operatively. There was not a significant difference in the non-operative and operative groups regarding proportions of patients with angulation greater than 15° or 25% or greater translation. There was no significant difference in time to bony consolidation. The operative group had more complications, but the rate was not significantly different than the non-operative group.
conclusionsIsolated distal ulna fractures, including those angulated greater than 15° or translated more than 25%, appear to heal well with non-operative treatment. Operative treatment of closed isolated distal ulna fractures does not appear to confer a treatment advantage when compared to non-operative treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.