Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33157997›Full record

ArticleMedicine2020

Additional table for easier access to ankle fracture: A retrospective study of traditional positioning versus modified positioning.

Bo Liu, Rui Jin, Saroj Rai, Ruikang Liu, Pan Hong

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 49% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Bo LiuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Chongqing High-tech Zone People's Hospital, Chongqing.
Rui JinDepartment of Thyroid and Breast Surgery, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Saroj RaiDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, National Trauma Center, National Academy of Medical Sciences, Mahankal, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Ruikang LiuFirst School of Clinical Medicine, Tongji Medical College.
Pan HongDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2674-3016
Union Hospital · CNFirst People's Hospital of Chongqing · CNNational Academy of Medical Sciences · NPTongji University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An interest in the fixation of posterior malleolus via the posterolateral approach has gained popularity recently. Most surgeons choose prone or lateral position during the surgery, and this study proposes an additional radiolucent table for easier access to the posterolateral anatomic structure of ankle joint, and compares it with traditional positioning.From September 2014 to September 2018, 21 patients with trimalleolar fractures and 28 patients with posterior malleolus and fibular fractures receiving open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using the posterolateral approach with the utilization of an additional radiolucent table were included in Additional Table group. Patients of matched sex, age, and injury type using the same surgical approach with the traditional positioning were selected from the hospital database and included in the Traditional group. Baseline information and clinical parameters were recorded.No significant differences existed concerning age, sex, or operative side between the 2 groups in patients with trimalleolar fractures. The time for positioning was significantly longer in the Traditional group (20.5 ± 6.45 minutes) than the Additional Table group (12 ± 3.5 minutes) (P < .001). Besides, the operative time in the Traditional group (75.28 ± 5.45 minutes) was significantly longer than the Additional Table group (58 ± 5.95 minutes) (P < .001). There was no case of nonunion and malunion in both groups. At 12-month follow-up, the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society Scale (AOFAS) score showed no significant difference between the 2 groups (P = .46). In patients with fibular fracture and posterior malleolus fracture, no significant differences existed concerning age, sex, operative side between the 2 groups. The time for positioning was significantly longer in the Traditional group (16.5 ± 3.45 minutes) than the Additional Table group (11 ± 3.5 minutes) (P < .001). Besides, the operative time in the Traditional group (55.28 ± 8.45 minutes) was significantly longer than the Additional Table group (44 ± 7.95 minutes) (P < .001). There was no case of nonunion and malunion in both groups. At the 12-month follow-up, the AOFAS score showed no significant difference between the 2 groups (P = .26).The novel positioning with an additional table is an excellent choice for trimalleolar fracture, posterior malleolus fracture, with/without distal fibular fracture.

Indexed as

Fracture Fixation, InternalOpen Fracture ReductionAdultAnkle FracturesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient PositioningRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID33157997
PMCPMC7647510
OpenAlexW3095306218

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.