Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32952919›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2020

Reliability of RUST and Modified RUST Scores for the Evaluation of Union in Humeral Shaft Fractures Treated with Different Techniques.

Abdulhamit Misir, Erdal Uzun, Turan Bilge Kizkapan, Kadir Ilker Yildiz, Murat Onder, Mustafa Ozcamdalli

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. PediLocJournal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Extra-capsular proximal femoral fractures: a cohort comparison of union and complication rates after ballistic versus blunt trauma.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025
    Article
  5. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Abdulhamit MisirDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Health Sciences University, Gaziosmanpasa Training and Research Hospital, Karayollari Mah. Osmanbey Cad. 621. Sk., Gaziosmanpasa, 34255 Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-5270-1429
Erdal UzunDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey.
Turan Bilge KizkapanDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Bursa Cekirge State Hospital, Bursa, Turkey.
Kadir Ilker YildizDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Health Sciences University, Baltalimani Bone and Joint Diseases Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Murat OnderDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Health Sciences University, Baltalimani Bone and Joint Diseases Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Mustafa OzcamdalliDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, Ahi Evran University, Kirsehir, Turkey.
Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi · TRAhi Evran University · TRBursa Technical University · TRErciyes University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe study aimed to evaluate the agreement between the radiographic union scale (RUST) and modified RUST (mRUST) in humeral shaft fractures treated with different techniques, and the effect of surgeons' experience and thresholds for determining bone union. MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 20 orthopedic surgeons reviewed and scored radiographs of 30 patients with humeral shaft fractures treated by external fixation, intramedullary nailing, and plating using the RUST and mRUST on the 0 day, 6 weeks, 12 weeks and 24 weeks follow-up radiographs. Bone healing, interrater agreement between RUST and mRUST scores, and the threshold for radiographic union were evaluated.

resultsThe intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was slightly higher for the mRUST score than the RUST score (0.71 versus [vs.] 0.67). There was substantial agreement between the mRUST and RUST scores for external fixation (0.75 and 0.69, respectively) and intramedullary nailing (0.79 and 0.71); there was moderate agreement between them for plating (0.59 and 0.55). Surgeons with varying experience had a similar agreement for both scores and scores for each humeral cortex. The external fixation and intramedullary nailing group had higher RUST and mRUST scores than the plating group. The ICC for union was substantial (0.64; external fixation: 0.68, intramedullary nailing: 0.64, and plating: 0.61). More than 90% of the reviewers recorded scores of 10/12 for RUST and 13/16 for mRUST at the time of union.

conclusionsRUST and mRUST scores can be used reliably for the evaluation of bony union in humeral fractures treated with an external fixator and intramedullary nailing. In cases of humeral plating, a more sensitive tool for evaluation of fracture union is needed.

Indexed as

External fixationHumeral shaft fractureHumerusInterrater agreementIntramedullary nailingPlatingRadiographic unionRUST scoreSurgeon experience

Identifiers

PMID32952919
PMCPMC7474044
OpenAlexW3039500559

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.