ArticleScientific reports2022
Reliability and accuracy of the torque applied to osteosynthesis screws by maxillofacial surgeons and residents.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Comparative Assessment of the Mechanical Response to Different Screw Dimensions in Scaphoid Fracture Fixation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Biomechanical Variability and Usability of a Novel Customizable Fracture Fixation Technique.Bioengineering (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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Applying the right torque to osteosynthesis screws is important for undisturbed bone healing. This study aimed to compare test-retest and intra-individual reliabilities of the torque applied to 1.5 mm and 2.0 mm osteosynthesis screws by residents and oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMF-surgeons), to define the reference torque intervals, and to compare reference torque interval compliances. Five experienced OMF-surgeons and 20 residents, 5 of each 4 residency years, were included. Each participant inserted six 1.5 × 4 mm and six 2.0 × 6 mm screws into a preclinical model at two test moments 2 weeks apart (T1 and T2). Participants were blinded for the applied torque. Descriptive statistics, reference intervals, and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated. The OMF-surgeons complied more to the reference intervals (1.5 mm screws: 95% and 2.0 mm screws: 100%) than the residents (82% and 90%, respectively; P = 0.009 and P = 0.007) with the ICCs ranging between 0.85-0.95 and 0.45-0.97, respectively. The residents' accuracy and reliability were inadequate regarding the 1.5 mm screws but both measures improved at T2 for both screw types compared to T1, indicating a learning effect. Training residents and/or verifying the applied torque by experienced OMF-surgeons remains necessary to achieve high accuracy and reliability, particularly for 1.5 mm screws.
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.