ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2021
Initial management of humeral shaft fractures with functional splints versus coaptation splints.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeHumerus shaft fractures are commonly acutely immobilized with coaptation splints (CS), which can be difficult to apply and poorly tolerated by the patient. Functional splints (FS), which work on the same principle as functional braces, are an alternative to CS. The purpose of this study was to directly compare CS and FS in terms of application and fracture reduction.
methodsA retrospective review identified humeral shaft fractures managed nonoperatively with initial immobilization in a FS (n = 19) versus a CS (n = 15). In addition, 13 residents completed a blinded survey on splint application.
resultsThe FS and CS groups did not differ in initial fracture angulation and translation on anteroposterior (AP) and lateral radiographs. Post-splint application, there was no clinically relevant difference in fracture angulation/translation between groups, and this persisted at the subsequent follow-up visit. All residents reported that the FS was easier to apply and took less time.
conclusionThis study results demonstrated the FS results in similar reductions in humeral shaft fractures as CS. A survey of residents found that the FS was easier to apply, took less time, and was better tolerated by patients. Subsequently, we prefer the FS over the CS for the acute management of humeral shaft fractures.
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.