Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29355444›Full record

ArticleActa orthopaedica2018

Patient injury claims involving fractures of the distal radius.

Henrik Sandelin, Eero Waris, Eero Hirvensalo, Jarkko Vasenius, Heini Huhtala, Timo Raatikainen, Teemu Helkamaa

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Henrik Sandelina Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology , Helsinki University Central Hospital and University of Helsinki , Helsinki.
Eero Warisb Department of Hand Surgery , Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki , Helsinki.
Eero Hirvensaloa Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology , Helsinki University Central Hospital and University of Helsinki , Helsinki.
Jarkko Vaseniusc Pohjola Hospital , Helsinki.
Heini Huhtalad Faculty of Social Sciences , University of Tampere , Tampere , Finland.
Timo Raatikainenb Department of Hand Surgery , Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki , Helsinki.
Teemu Helkamaaa Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology , Helsinki University Central Hospital and University of Helsinki , Helsinki.
Helsinki University Hospital · FIUniversity of Helsinki · FITampere University · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose - Optimal treatment for distal radius fractures remains controversial, with a significant number of fractures resulting in complications and long-term morbidity. We investigated patient injury claims related to distal radius fractures to detect the critical steps in the treatment leading to avoidable adverse events Patients and methods - We analyzed all compensated patient injury claims in Finland between 2007 and 2011. Claims were collected from the Patient Insurance Center's (PIC) nationwide claim register. Patients of all ages were included. Each claim decision, original patient records, and radiographs related to treatment were reviewed. Results - During the study period, the PIC received 584 claims regarding distal radius fractures, of which 208 (36%) were compensated. Pain and impaired wrist function were the most common subjective reasons to file claims among compensated patients. In 66/208 patients, more than 1 adverse event leading to patient injury was detected. The detected adverse events could be divided into 3 main groups: diagnostic errors (36%, n = 103), decision/planning errors (30%, n = 87), and insufficient technical execution (32%, n = 91). Issues related to malalignment were the main concerns in each group. Diagnostic errors were often related to incorrect assessment of the fracture (re)displacement (75%, n = 78). All of the decision-making errors concerned physicians' decisions to accept unsatisfactory fracture alignment. The most common technical error was insufficient reduction (29%, n = 26). Interpretation - We identified avoidable adverse events behind patient injuries related to distal radius fracture treatment. This study will help physicians to recognize the critical steps in the treatment of this common fracture and enhance patient safety.

Indexed as

Insurance Claim ReportingAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildCompensation and RedressFemaleFinlandFracture FixationHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadius FracturesRetrospective StudiesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29355444
PMCPMC5901525
OpenAlexW2793856498

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.