ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Treatment preferences and current practices regarding open tibial shaft fractures.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Orthoplastic soft tissue management in lower limb open tibial fractures based on the angiosome concept: a narrative review.EFORT open reviews · 2026Review
- Comparison of functional recovery between 3D-printed automatic reset splints and traditional fluoroscopy-assisted reduction external fixators in the treatment of tibial shaft fractures.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Open Tibial Fractures Part 1: A Narrative Review of Initial Treatment and Potential Applicability to the Southern African Context.Orthopedic research and reviews · 2025Review
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
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to reveal the treatment preferences and current practices regarding open tibial shaft fracture (OTSF). Patients and methods: Online surveys of treatment preferences and current practice of OTSF were conducted by orthopedic trauma doctors from various medical institutions in Zhejiang Province. The survey contains three modules. The first module is the basic information of the participants, the second module is the treatment patterns for Gustilo-Anderson type I-II (GA I/II), and the third module is the treatment patterns for Gustilo-Anderson type IIIA (GA IIIA). Furthermore, each treatment pattern was divided into four aspects, including antibiotic prophylaxis, irrigation and debridement, fracture stabilization, and wound management. Results: A total of 132 orthopedic trauma doctors from 41 hospitals in Zhejiang province, participated the online surveys. In GA I-IIIA OTSF, more than three-quarters of participants considered <3 h as the appropriate timing of antibiotic administration after trauma. In fact, only 41.67% of participants administered antibiotics within 3 h after trauma. 90.91 and 86.36% of participants thought debridement within 6 h was reasonable for GA I/II and GA IIIA OTSF, respectively. However, in reality only about half of patients received debridement within 6 h on average. The most common reason for delayed debridement was patients' transport delay. 87.88 and 97.3% of participants preferred secondary internal fixation following external fixation for GA I/II and GA IIIA OTSF, respectively. Additionally, over half of participants preferred use of locking plate for treating GA I-IIIA OTSF. The most common reasons for choosing delayed internal fixation for GA I-IIIA OTSF were infection risk and damage control. 78.79 and 65.91% supported immediate internal fixation after removing the external fixation for GA I-IIIA OTSF, respectively. Regarding wound closure, 86.36 and 63.64% of participants reported primary closure for GA I/II and GA IIIA OTSF, respectively. Over three fourths of participants agreed that preoperative and postoperative multiple wound cultures should be performed to predict infection for GA I-IIIA OTSF. Conclusion: The study first presents the current preference and practice regarding management of GA I-IIIA OTSF in Zhejiang. Majority of surgeons in our study preferred secondary internal fixation following external fixation for GA I-IIIA OTSF and over half of surgeons preferred use of locking plate for treating GA I-IIIA OTSF. This study may provide a reference for trauma orthopedic surgeons in the treatment of GA I-IIIA OTSF.
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.