ArticleInternational wound journal2024
Comparative study of wound outcomes and surgical strategies: Internal fixation versus external stabilization in rib fracture patients with traumatic chest wounds.
Article in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- RETRACTION: Comparative Study of Wound Outcomes and Surgical Strategies: Internal Fixation Versus External Stabilization in Rib Fracture Patients with Traumatic Chest Wounds.International wound journal · 2025Article
- Non-demographic dependent mechanisms of DVT formation in patients with traumatic limb fractures: an exploratory cohort study based on limited variable matching.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Comparative study of wound outcomes and surgical strategies: Internal fixation versus external stabilization in rib fracture patients with traumatic chest wounds.International wound journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Retracted
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The clinical management of traumatic chest incisions accompanied by rib fractures presents the formidable challenge. The study was carried out to compare the outcomes of auscultatory triangle internal fixation (ATIF) and external fixation (EF) in such injuries. From June 2019 to June 2022, 105 patients with multiple rib fractures participated in the cohort study in which they were divided into two groups: 53 patients underwent ATIF and 52 patients underwent EF. The incidence of surgical site infection, wound healing time, incidence of wound dehiscence, number of dressing changes, pain as measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS), duration of hospitalization, period of return to work, pulmonary complications and functionality of the upper limbs as assessed by the Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire were among the parameters evaluated. In comparison with EF, ATIF demonstrated the decreased incidence of wound dehiscence (1.9% vs. 9.6%) (p < 0.05), surgical site infection (3.8 vs. 11.5) and wound healing time (12.3 ± 2.1 vs. 18.5 ± 3.7 days) (p < 0.05). Furthermore, during their ATIF treatment, patients required fewer changes of dressing (3.5 ± 0.8 vs. 5.7 ± 1.2) and demonstrated enhanced pain management, reduced hospital stays and expedited return to work (p < 0.05). ATIF group demonstrated enhancements in both upper limb functionality and post-operative pulmonary function (p < 0.05). The utilization of ATIF as opposed to EF for the treatment of traumatic chest wounds accompanied by rib fractures yields superior outcomes in terms of wound healing, infection reduction and restoration of pulmonary and upper limb functionality.
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.