ArticleCureus2021
Plate Osteosynthesis or Figure-of-Eight Brace: Which One Is Better in Midshaft Clavicle Fractures?
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conservative vs surgical treatment of midshaft clavicular fractures: a systematic review.EFORT open reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Replicability of Highly Cited Comparative Studies in Orthopedic Journals.HCA healthcare journal of medicine · 2026Review
- Effect of Sextant Fixating Angle of Spiral Clavicle Plate on Biomechanical Stability-A Preliminary Finite Element Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Functional outcomes and complications of plate fixation for midshaft clavicle fractures by type and location: a systematic review and meta-analysis.JSES international · 2024Review
- Long-term conservative treatment outcomes for midshaft clavicle fractures: a 10-to-30-year follow-up.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- An Institutional Standardised Protocol for the Treatment of Acute Displaced Midshaft Clavicle Fractures (ADMCFs): Conservative or Surgical Management for Active Patients?Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Fracture of the clavicle bone is a very common injury owing to its subcutaneous location. Controversy exists about the optimal treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures in the presence of significant displacement and comminution of the fracture. Traditionally, non-surgical management was considered the first treatment option for most clavicle fractures. However, recent evidence shows that the non-surgical option causes more complications than previously reported. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of conservative treatment and surgical treatment for midshaft clavicle fractures. Materials and methods A total of 45 patients meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this randomized study. The patients were allocated to two groups: conservative and operative on an alternate basis. Patients in the conservative group were managed with figure-of-eight bandage, whereas patients in the operative group were treated surgically by plate fixation. Primary outcome was recorded at six weeks, three months, six months, and 12 months follow-up using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores. We also assessed patient's satisfaction after the treatment, fracture union, and complication rates among the study cohort. Results The ASES scores were significantly better in the operative group at three months and six months follow-up; however, at 12 months follow-up, there was no significant difference in the score between the groups. Although not statistically significant, the DASH score was better in the operative group than in the conservative group at all the follow-ups. This study showed that the time to union was lesser, rate of non-union was lower, and return to work was faster on the operative group. The mean satisfaction score in the operative and conservative groups was 4.16±0.76 and 4.05±1.24, respectively (p = 0.76). Conclusion This study suggests that open reduction and internal fixation with plate reduced the incidence of mal-union and non-union; however, surgical treatment showed no significant difference in the functional outcome as compared to conservative treatment.
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.