ArticleJournal of rehabilitation medicine2024
Long-term functional and clinical outcome of combined targeted muscle reinnervation and osseointegration for functional bionic reconstruction in transhumeral amputees: a case series.
Article in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Thirty years of high-voltage injuries: comparative analysis of train surfing and work-related cases with a focus on trauma-associated diagnoses.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe and evaluate the combination of osseointegration and nerve transfers in 3 transhumeral amputees.
designCase series. PATIENTS: Three male patients with a unilateral traumatic transhumeral amputation.
methodsPatients received a combination of osseointegration and targeted muscle reinnervation surgery. Rehabilitation included graded weight training, range of motion exercises, biofeedback, table-top prosthesis training, and controlling the actual device. The impairment in daily life, health-related quality of life, and pain before and after the intervention was evaluated in these patients. Their shoulder range of motion, prosthesis embodiment, and function were documented at a 2- to 5-year follow-up.
resultsAll 3 patients attended rehabilitation and used their myoelectric prosthesis on a daily basis. Two patients had full shoulder range of motion with the prosthesis, while the other patient had 55° of abduction and 45° of anteversion. They became more independent in their daily life activities after the intervention and incorporated their prosthesis into their body scheme to a high extent.
conclusionThese results indicate that patients can benefit from the combined procedure. However, the patients' perspective, risks of the surgical procedures, and the relatively long rehabilitation procedure need to be incorporated in the decision-making.
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.