Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31728190›Full record

ArticleBone & joint research2019

Comparison of Baumgaertner and Chang reduction quality criteria for the assessment of trochanteric fractures.

Wei Mao, Haofei Ni, Linli Li, Yiqun He, Xujun Chen, Han Tang, Youhai Dong

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Bone & joint research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. [Anteromedial cortical support reduction in treatment of trochanteric femur fractures: a ten-year reappraisal].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Wei MaoDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Fifth People's Hospital of Shanghai, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Haofei NiDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Fifth People's Hospital of Shanghai, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Linli LiDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Fifth People's Hospital of Shanghai, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Yiqun HeDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Fifth People's Hospital of Shanghai, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Xujun ChenDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Fifth People's Hospital of Shanghai, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Han TangDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Fifth People's Hospital of Shanghai, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Youhai DongDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Fifth People's Hospital of Shanghai, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDifferent criteria for assessing the reduction quality of trochanteric fractures have been reported. The Baumgaertner reduction quality criteria (BRQC) are relatively common and the Chang reduction quality criteria (CRQC) are relatively new. The objectives of the current study were to compare the reliability of the BRQC and CRQC in predicting mechanical complications and to investigate the clinical implications of the CRQC.

methodsA total of 168 patients were assessed in a retrospective observational study. Clinical information including age, sex, fracture side, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, tip-apex distance (TAD), fracture classification, reduction quality, blade position, BRQC, CRQC, bone quality, and the occurrence of mechanical complications were used in the statistical analysis.

resultsA total of 127 patients were included in the full analysis, and mechanical complications were observed in 26 patients. The TAD, blade position, BRQC and CRQC were significantly associated with mechanical complications in the univariate analysis. Only the TAD (p = 0.025) and the CRQC (p < 0.001) showed significant results in the multivariate analysis. In the comparison of the receiver operating characteristic curves, the CRQC also performed better than the BRQC.

conclusionThe CRQC are reliable in predicting mechanical complications and are more reliable than the BRQC. Future studies could use the CRQC to assess fracture reduction quality. Intraoperatively, the surgeon should refer to the CRQC to achieve good reduction in trochanteric fractures.

Indexed as

Baumgaertner reduction quality criteriaChang reduction quality criteriaMechanical complicationsTrochanteric fractures

Identifiers

PMID31728190
PMCPMC6825041

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.