ArticleCureus2025
Virtual Fracture Clinic: A Helping Hand for an Overburdened Traditional Fracture Clinic in a Busy Major Trauma Center.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Introduction Virtual fracture clinics (VFCs) were established to improve the efficiency of orthopedic care by reducing unnecessary face-to-face consultations, decreasing waiting times, and providing timely specialist advice. This study aims to evaluate the utilization of the VFC at Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (Cambridge, GBR), over 12 months and assess its effectiveness in managing patients referred from emergency departments and minor injury units. Methods This retrospective study included all patients referred to the VFC between January 2023 and January 2024. Data were collected from hospital electronic records and analyzed using SPSS Statistics version 20.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Patients were assessed by a consultant orthopaedic surgeon based on referral details and imaging findings. Clinical outcomes were documented as face-to-face consultation, discharge with patient-initiated follow-up (PIFU), or referral to subspecialty clinics. Results A total of 5,034 patients were reviewed by the VFC. The most common injuries involved the wrist, hand, foot, ankle, shoulder, and knee. Of the total patients, 62% were discharged with PIFU, while 30.4% required face-to-face consultation. Among patients initially discharged with PIFU, 16.9% were subsequently rebooked into subspecialty clinics for further evaluation. Statistical analysis demonstrated a significant association between injury type and VFC outcome, indicating a moderate effect size. Conclusions The VFC model effectively managed a substantial proportion of patients referred from emergency departments and minor injury units, providing safe and efficient care while reducing the burden on traditional fracture clinics.
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.