ArticleHand (New York, N.Y.)2022
Predictors of Management of Distal Radius Fractures in Patients Aged >65 Years.
Article in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surgeon Preferences and Outcome Predictions for Displaced Distal Radius Fractures in Elderly Patients: A Survey of 151 Surgeons Making 4,832 Treatment Predictions Based on Patient Profiles and Radiographs.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2026Article
- ESTES recommendations regarding distal radius fractures.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTreatment of distal radius fractures (DRFs) in patients aged >65 years is controversial. The purpose of this study was to identify what patient and fracture characteristics may influence the decision to pursue surgical versus nonsurgical treatment in patients aged >65 years sustaining a DRF.
methodsWe queried our institutional DRF database for patients aged >65 years who presented to a single academic, tertiary center hand clinic over a 5-year period. In all, 164 patients treated operatively were identified, and 162 patients treated nonoperatively during the same time period were selected for comparison (total N = 326). Demographic variables and fracture-specific variables were recorded. Patient and fracture characteristics between the groups were compared to determine which variables were associated with each treatment modality (operative or nonoperative).
resultsThe average age in our cohort was 72 (SD: 11) years, and 274 patients (67%) were women. The average Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was 4.1 (SD: 2.1). The CCI is a validated tool that predicts 1-year mortality based on patient age and a list of 22 weighted comorbidities. Factors associated with operative treatment in our population were largely related to the severity of the injury and included increasing dorsal tilt (odds ratio [OR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.12;
conclusionFracture severity is a strong driver in the decision to pursue operative management in patients aged >65 years, whereas increasing CCI predicts nonoperative 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.