Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39165869›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of orthopedics2024

Clinical effect of operative

Yang Li, Yi Luo, Jing Peng, Jun Fan, Xiao-Tao Long

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of orthopedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Revisiting the debate on operativeWorld journal of orthopedics · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Yang LiDepartment of Traumatic Orthopedics, Chongqing General Hospital, Chongqing University, Chongqing 401147, China.
Yi LuoDepartment of Orthopedics, Bishan Hospital of Chongqing, Chongqing 402760, China.
Jing PengDepartment of Traumatic Orthopedics, Chongqing General Hospital, Chongqing University, Chongqing 401147, China. pengjing320@foxmail.com.
Jun FanDepartment of Traumatic Orthopedics, Chongqing General Hospital, Chongqing University, Chongqing 401147, China.
Xiao-Tao LongDepartment of Traumatic Orthopedics, Chongqing General Hospital, Chongqing University, Chongqing 401147, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhether operation is superior to non-operation for humeral shaft fracture remains debatable. We hypothesized that operation could decrease the nonunion and reintervention rates and increase the functional outcomes.

aimTo compare the clinical efficacy between operative and nonoperative approaches for humeral shaft fractures.

methodsWe searched the PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane databases from 1990 to December 2023 for clinical trials and cohort studies comparing the effects of operative and conservative methods on humeral shaft fractures. Two investigators independently extracted data from the eligible studies, and the other two assessed the methodological quality of each study. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk bias or Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The nonunion, reintervention and the overall complications and functional scores were pooled and analyzed using Review Manager software (version 5.3).

resultsA total of four randomized control trials and 13 cohort studies were included, with 1285 and 1346 patients in the operative and nonoperative groups, respectively. Patients in the operative group were treated with a plate or nail, whereas those in the conservative group were managed with splint or functional bracing. Four studies were assessed as having a high risk of bias, and the other 13 were of a low risk of bias according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale or Cochrane risk bias tool. The operative group had a significantly decreased rate of nonunion [odds ratio (OR) 0.30; 95%CI: 0.23 to 0.40), reintervention (OR: 0.33; 95%CI: 0.24 to 0.47), and overall complications (OR: 0.62; 95%CI: 0.49 to 0.78)]. The pooled effect of the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score showed a significant difference at 3 [mean difference (MD) -8.26; 95%CI: -13.60 to -2.92], 6 (MD: -6.72; 95%CI: -11.34 to -2.10), and 12 months (MD: -2.55; 95%CI: -4.36 to -0.74). The pooled effect of Visual Analog Scale scores and the Constant-Murley score did not significantly differ between the two groups.

conclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis revealed a trend of rapid functional recovery and decreased rates of nonunion and reintervention after operation for humeral shaft fracture compared to conservative treatment.

Indexed as

BraceHumeral shaft fractureNonoperationOperationSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39165869
PMCPMC11331324

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.