ArticleOrthopedic reviews2025
Return to work after proximal humeral fractures: a single center study comparing conservative versus operative treatment.
Article in Orthopedic reviews, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Adequate treatment of proximal humeral fractures (PHF) is essential for restoring shoulder function and expediting return-to-work (RTW). This study aims to assess the impact of conservative and operative treatments on RTW and PHF recovery. Objective & Methods: In a retrospective case-control study, 858 patients (aged 18-68) treated for PHF between 2018 and 2021 were included. Questionnaires were sent to 342 operatively treated patients (Operative group (OG)) and 191 conservatively treated matched controls (Conservative group (CG)). Assessments covered RTW, functional outcomes (DASH, ASES), and quality of life (EQ-5D). A Kaplan-Meier analysis explored RTW in weeks. Results: With a 61% response rate, 73 eligible participants (40 OG, 33 CG) contributed. Of respondents, 67.1% were female, and 60% were employed pre-trauma. Almost 70% of employed patients RTW, with no significant difference between groups (log rank, p=0.36). Among those returning to work, OG tended to resume 4 weeks later than CG (OG 10.5, IQR 22 vs. CG 6.00, IQR 8 weeks, p=0.07). DASH, ASES, and quality of life VAS scores showed no statistical difference between groups (p=0.542, p=0.257, p=0.530, respectively). Conclusion: The RTW proportion did not differ between operatively and conservatively treated PHF patients, though the former tended to return 4 weeks later. Functional outcomes demonstrated no significant differences. Further adequately powered studies are necessary to establish a standardized aftercare protocol for PHF, enhancing patient care and minimizing work disability.
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.