Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34603887›Full record

ArticleCureus2021

Comparison of Treatment Options of Three- and Four-Part Humerus Proximal Fractures in Patients Over 50 Years of Age.

Firat Erpala, Mesut Tahta, Tahir Öztürk, Çağatay Zengin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
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

4 authors.

Firat ErpalaOrthopedics and Traumatology, Cesme State Hospital, Izmir, TUR.
Mesut TahtaOrthopedics and Traumatology, Egepol Surgery Hospital, Izmir, TUR.
Tahir ÖztürkOrthopedics and Traumatology, Tokat Gaziosmanpaşa University, Tokat, TUR.
Çağatay ZenginOrthopedics and Traumatology, Gaziosmanpasa University School of Medicine, Tokat, TUR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Our aim was to evaluate different treatment methods including conservative treatment (CT), locking-plate osteosynthesis (OS) and hemiarthroplasty (HA) in three- and four-part humeral fractures in patients older than 50 years. Methods Forty-seven patients that have at least one year of follow-up were divided into three groups: 18 patients treated with OS, 14 patients treated conservatively and 15 patients treated with HA. For further evaluation, constant shoulder score, disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand score (DASH), American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) score had been used. Shoulder range of motion was also assessed. Results OS and CT groups had better scores than HA group. In OS group, average Constant score was 71.6 ± 16.2, DASH score was 12.1 (5.2-24.2) and ASES score was 77.5 (50.8-96.6). In CT group, average Constant score was 69.6 ± 19.2, DASH score was 16.4 (12.5-36.7) and ASES score was 76.6 (45.4-87.9). DASH scores (p = 0.032), Constant scores (p = 0.001), forward elevation (p < 0.001), abduction (p < 0.001), internal (p = 0.022) and external rotation (p = 0.048) were significantly improved in OS and CT groups than HA group. Conclusions HA should not be considered a priority in surgical planning in Neer three-part and four-part proximal humerus fractures. CT is superior for patients with additional morbidity and advanced age. But in patients who are younger and can tolerate the surgical procedure, the priority should be OS.

Indexed as

neer 3- and 4-part fracturesosteosynthesisproximal humerus fracturesshoulder hemiarthroplastyupper extremity trauma

Identifiers

PMID34603887
PMCPMC8476210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.