ArticleBone & joint open2025
Assessment of applicability of Ganga Hospital Score in the management of open tibia fracture.
Article in Bone & joint open, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Open fractures of the tibia encompass a wide spectrum of injuries, posing multiple challenges for treating surgeons. This study evaluates the Ganga Hospital Open Injury Severity Score (GHOISS) in predicting the outcomes of open tibia fractures in Rwanda, focusing on its ability to guide wound management choices and assist in decision-making between preservation and amputation. Methods: This was a prospective cohort study conducted between March and September 2022 in Kigali, Rwanda, involving patients aged 18 years and older with open tibial fractures. The GHOISS was calculated, and the patients were organized into three groups: Group I: score 1 to 13; Group II: score 14 to 16; and Group III: score ≥ 17. Outcome data were collected at one and six months of follow-up. The predictive validity of the GHOISS was determined through sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. Correlation and analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were also conducted to compare groups. Ethical considerations were respected, and institutional review board approval was obtained. Results: The study involved 111 participants, with a mean age of 34 years (18 to 80) and a male-to-female ratio of 3.44:1. The amputation rate was 10 (9.0%), with a mean hospital stay of 30.55 days (SD 34.09). The infection rate was 54.05%, and the need for soft-tissue reconstruction was 36.9%. The GHOISS in predicting the amputation showed high sensitivity of 100% and sensitivity of 96.03%, with a positive predictive value of 71.4% and negative predictive value of 100%. ANOVA revealed significant differences between the groups (F (2,108) = 21.12; p < 0.001), and a strong positive correlation was found between the covering tissue score and the need for soft-tissue reconstruction. Conclusion: The GHOISS demonstrated a remarkable ability to predict amputation and salvage in open tibia fractures and the potential for predicting related outcomes. The GHOISS subscore, which assesses skin and covering injuries, has shown a significant ability to predict the need for soft-tissue reconstruction.
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.