ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2014
Comparison of treatment of fracture midshaft clavicle in adults by external fixator with conservative treatment.
Article in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating fractures of the middle third of the clavicle.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Off-label use of orthopedical trauma implants in a low-income country.International orthopaedics · 2022Article
- Displaced mid-shaft clavicular fractures: state of the art for athletes and young active people.International orthopaedics · 2021Review
- Cutaneous paresthesia after internal plate fixation of clavicle fractures and underlying anatomical observations.Medicine · 2018Observational
- Comparative Results of External Fixation, Plating, or Nonoperative Management for Diaphyseal Clavicle Fractures.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeHigh rate of malunion and non union in displaced fracture clavicle treated conservatively lead to use of different types of internal fixation methods which also were found to be associated with various complications. Moreover their superiority over conservative treatment has not been established. This study was designed to compare clinical outcome of conservative treatment with external fixator in cases with displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.
methodsFifty adult consenting cases of acute midshaft fracture clavicle, displaced >15 mm were included. Twenty five cases were allotted to conservative (group A) and external fixator (group B) each. In group A treatment was given in form of clavicle brace. In group B schanz pins were inserted obliquely between supero-inferior and anterior-posterior direction and connected with rod. The outcome was measured by Constant score, union time and complications.
resultsMean radiographic union time in group A was 23.45 ± 1.40 weeks (with 8% non union and 80% malunion) and in group B it was 9.36 ± 1.49 weeks. Mean Constant score at 6 months in group A was 78.28 ± 6.45 and in group B 92.72 ± 1.48. Mean shortening at 6 months in group A was 19.36 mm. In group B shortening at 6 months was noticed in three cases (6, 5, 6 mm).
conclusionClose reduction of acute fracture mid clavicle and application of external fixator is a simple procedure providing the benefits of rigid fixation and undisturbed fracture environment. Pain relief is faster, union time is shorter and there are no hardware related problems.
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.