ArticleHand (New York, N.Y.)2024
Traumatic Finger Amputations: Epidemiology and Mechanism of Injury, 2010-2019.
Article in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of Multilayer Dermal Regeneration Templates in Fingertip and Nail Bed Reconstruction: A Retrospective Comparative Study.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Article
- Analysis of epidemiology, etiology and injury patterns in 2,179 digit amputations.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Admission of Upper Extremity Injuries Presenting to the Emergency Department: An NEISS Study.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Partial hand and finger amputations in Sweden: an observational study of 6918 patients.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraumatic finger amputations are a common and well-known hand injury, yet there are few studies addressing long-term epidemiologic data and associated mechanisms of injury. This paper aims to use a large national database to identify the relationship of patient demographics and mechanism of injury in finger amputations.
methodsThe National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) was queried for finger amputations in the United States from 2010 to 2019. Patient demographic information was collected and analyzed by gender, race, age, and further statistical analysis was performed to determine correlations with consumer products.
resultsFinger amputations accounted for an estimated 234,304 emergency department visits from 2010 to 2019. Most of the patients were male (79%) and identified as white (46.2%). The most commonly implicated products overall were power saws and related power tools, followed by doors and then lawn mowers. A bimodal age incidence was observed with the highest incidence rates occurring in children ages 0 to 4, followed by a second peak incidence rate in the adults ages 65 to 74. The most common mechanisms of injury were found to differ in patients less than 19 and those 20 and over.
conclusionTraumatic finger amputations have a bimodal incidence with changing epidemiology and mechanism of injury with age. The first peak occurs from ages 0 to 4, involves predominantly doors, and has a male to female ratio of 1.30. The second peak occurs from ages 65 to 74, involves mostly power saws, and has a male to female ratio of 6.68. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, Level IV.
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.