ArticleHand (New York, N.Y.)2018
Comparison of Treatment Results for Mallet Finger Fractures in Children Between Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound Stimulation and Ishiguro's Method.
Article in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retrospective study of Ishiguro's technique for mallet bone finger in children: long-term follow-up and analysis of predictors in outcomes.International orthopaedics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe compared the treatment results for displaced mallet finger fractures in children between low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) stimulation and Ishiguro's method, which involves extension block and arthrodesis of the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint with pinning.
methodsEleven cases (5 females and 6 males; average age, 13.5 years) of mallet finger were operated with Ishiguro's method, and 8 cases (3 females and 5 males; average age, 13.0 years) were treated with LIPUS stimulation. Lateral radiographs were used to determine the distance of fragment displacement and the percentage of the articular surface involved in the fragments. Functional outcomes in flexion and extension and those estimated using Crawford's evaluation criteria at the final visits were assessed in each group.
resultsThe duration needed for fracture healing was longer, however, active extension and flexion of the DIP joint were significantly larger in the LIPUS group compared with those in the pinning group. Functional recovery was excellent in all cases in the LIPUS group; however, recovery was good in 3 cases and excellent in 8 cases in the pinning group. Extension of the DIP joint was significantly larger when pins were removed in 35 or lesser days postoperatively compared with cases in which pin fixation was continued for more than 35 days.
conclusionsLIPUS therapy may be recommended as an option to treat type I mallet finger in children for whom initiation of treatment was delayed up to 8 weeks. When Ishiguro's method is applied to the displaced mallet fracture in children, arthrodesis of the DIP joint for more than 5 weeks should be avoided to prevent flexion contracture.
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.