ArticleStrategies in trauma and limb reconstruction
Patient-reported Outcome and Quality of Life after Treatment with External Fixation: A Questionnaire-based Survey.
Article in Strategies in trauma and limb reconstruction. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Self-Reported 20-Year Outcome of Taylor Spatial Frame Correction for Distal Femoral Physeal Growth Disturbance: A Case Report.JBJS case connector · 2026Article
- Article
- Outcome of limb lengthening as a treatment for shortening following successful replantation of traumatic leg amputation: experience with 21 patients.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Fracture related infection in open tibial fractures.Journal of orthopaedics · 2024Article
- The role of psychology in multidisciplinary preparation of pediatric patients undergoing limb lengthening and reconstruction.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2024Review
- Dual Femoral and Tibial Osteotomies for Large Varus and Valgus Deformities.Strategies in trauma and limb reconstructionArticle
- Tibial Lengthening with a Motorized Intramedullary Lengthening Nail.JBJS essential surgical techniquesArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis survey aims to assess the satisfaction of patients who have had treatment using external fixation (EF). MATERIALS AND
methodsAn original questionnaire and a Short Form 36 (SF-36) were distributed to 121 patients who underwent treatment using EF for deformity correction and lengthening between 2006 and 2016. A multivariate analysis was performed on the factors associated with satisfaction.
resultsSixty patients returned a response. The average satisfaction score was 83.6 points. In the 5-point satisfaction survey, 43 of 60 patients (71.7%) responded "very satisfied" or "satisfied" and 27 patients (45.0%) responded "yes" to the question as to whether they would request EF treatment again if presenting with the original preoperative condition. In addition, the subjectively expressed tolerance for having an external fixator device on the limb was 92.1 days on average. A correlation was established with the ISOLS score.
conclusionThe top three factors that determined subjective inconvenience with EF are pain, walking, and heaviness. Although EF treatment was stressful, the satisfaction scores were high. Furthermore, the satisfaction with EF treatment was improved by (1) pain control, (2) shortening the EF period, and (3) psychological support. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Ugaji S, Matsubara H, Kato S,
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.