ArticleJournal of orthopedics for physician assistants
3D-Printed Orthoses vs Conventional Immobilization Methods for Pediatric Distal Radius Fractures.
Article in Journal of orthopedics for physician assistants. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Distal radius fracture (DRF) is the most common fracture among pediatric patients, usually occurring after a fall onto an outstretched hand. The growing incidence of DRFs highlights the need to explore improved treatment methods to ensure proper healing and realignment. Current immobilization methods are inconsistent and have negative impacts on patient satisfaction. Drawbacks of fiberglass casts include thermal injuries, discomfort, and increased risk of skin infection. While prefabricated splints have less downsides than fiberglass casts, skin irritation and odor are still a concern. 3D-printed orthoses present a viable alternative to traditional immobilization methods for DRFs, especially in the pediatric population. By scanning the fractured radius, the orthosis is tailored specifically to the patient's anatomy. 3D-printed orthoses are water resistant, breathable, and tend to weigh less. As a result, they offer improved hygiene, comfort, and patient satisfaction while reducing complications seen with more traditional methods of immobilization. Preliminary research suggests 3D-printed orthoses are as effective as traditional immobilization methods in pediatric patients with DRFs. However, additional studies are needed to further assess the patient satisfaction, compliance, and durability of 3D-printed orthoses compared to traditional immobilization methods in the pediatric population.
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.