ArticleJSES international2024
A retrospective analysis of functional and radiographic outcomes of humeral shaft fractures treated operatively versus nonoperatively.
Article in JSES international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rare "double tragedy" and successful salvage strategy after failed bilateral humeral fracture fixation in a resource-constrained setting: a case report.Patient safety in surgery · 2025Article
- Minimally Invasive Posterior Plating for Comminuted Middle to Distal One-Third Humeral Shaft Fractures: A Case Report.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To determine differences in functional outcomes, return to work, and complications, in operatively vs. nonoperatively treated diaphyseal humeral shaft fractures. Methods: 150 patients who presented to our center with a diaphyseal humeral shaft fracture (Orthopedic Trauma Association type 12) treated by open reduction internal fixation or closed reduction with bracing were retrospectively reviewed. Data collected included patient demographics, injury information, surgical details, and employment data. Clinical, radiographic, and patient-reported functional outcomes were recorded at routine standard-of-care follow-ups. Complications were recorded. Outcomes were analyzed using standard statistical methods and compared. Results: 150 patients with a mean 24.4 months of follow-up (12 to 60 months) were included for analysis. 83 (55.3%) patients were treated with nonoperative care in a functional brace. The rest were treated surgically. The mean time to healing did not differ between the cohorts ( Conclusion: More patients treated surgically had functional range of motion by 6 weeks. Functional gains should be weighed by the patient and surgeon against risk of surgery, nonunion, nerve injury, and infection when considering various treatment options to better accommodate patients' needs.
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.