Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38152437›Full record

ArticleOTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma2023

Current consensus and clinical approach to fragility fractures of the pelvis: an international survey of expert opinion.

Laura Jill Kleeblad, Sverre A I Loggers, Wietse P Zuidema, Daphne van Embden, Theodore Miclau, Kees-Jan Ponsen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Clinical outcomes in fragility fractures of the pelvis; what can we tell our patients?European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Laura Jill KleebladDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Northwest Clinics, Alkmaar, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2818-3887
Sverre A I LoggersDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Northwest Clinics, Alkmaar, the Netherlands.
Wietse P ZuidemaDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Daphne van EmbdenDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Theodore MiclauOrthopaedic Trauma Institute, Institute for Global Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, CA.
Kees-Jan PonsenDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Northwest Clinics, Alkmaar, the Netherlands.
Northwest Hospital · USAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLOrthopaedic Trauma Association · USSan Francisco General Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP) in elderly patients are an underappreciated injury with a significant impact on mobility, independency, and mortality of affected patients and is a growing burden for society/health care. Given the lack of clinical practice guidelines for these injuries, the authors postulate there is heterogeneity in the current use of diagnostic modalities, treatment strategies (both operative and nonoperative), and follow-up of patients with FFP. The goal of this study was to assess international variation in the management of FFP. Methods: All International Orthopaedic Trauma Association (IOTA) steering committee members were asked to select 15 to 20 experts in the field of pelvic surgery to complete a case-driven international survey. The survey addresses the definition of FFP, use of diagnostic modalities, timing of imaging, mobilization protocols, and indications for surgical management. Results: In total, 143 experts within 16 IOTA societies responded to the survey. Among the experts, 86% have >10 years of experience and 80% works in a referral center for pelvic fractures. However, only 44% of experts reported having an institutional protocol for the management of FFP. More than 89% of experts feel the need for a (inter)national evidence-based guideline. Of all experts, 73% use both radiographs and computed tomography (CT) to diagnose FFP, of which 63% routinely use CT and 35% used CT imaging selectively. Treatment strategies of anterior ring fractures were compared with combined (anterior and posterior ring) fractures. Thirty-seven percent of patients with anterior ring fractures get admitted to the hospital compared with 75% of patients with combined fractures. Experts allow pain-guided mobilization in 72% after anterior ring fracture but propose restricted weight-bearing in case of a combined fracture in 44% of patients. Surgical indications are primarily based on the inability to mobilize during hospital admission (33%) or persistent pain after 2 weeks (25%). Over 92% plan outpatient follow-up independent of the type of fracture or treatment. Conclusion: This study shows that there is a great worldwide heterogeneity in the current use of diagnostic modalities and both nonoperative and surgical management of FFP, emphasizing the need for a consensus meeting or guideline.

Indexed as

diagnosticsfollow-up strategiesfragility fractures of the pelvis(non)operative treatmentosteoporosis

Identifiers

PMID38152437
PMCPMC10750456
OpenAlexW4390348109

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.