ArticleCureus2025
The Surgical Burden of Animal Bites Referred to Orthopaedics: A 10-Year Cohort Study of 168 Patients From a UK Major Trauma Centre.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Clinic-based characteristics of animal-related injury presentations in Hangzhou, China: a 10-year retrospective analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Animal bites impose a substantial, yet under-recognised, burden on orthopaedic services. We characterised the epidemiology, injury patterns, management, and short-term outcomes of bite injuries requiring orthopaedic input at a UK Major Trauma Centre over 10 years. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients referred to orthopaedics with animal-bite injuries between December 2015 and March 2025. Eligible cases were identified from a prospectively maintained trauma database and verified against electronic records. Inclusion encompassed mammalian, reptile, avian, fish, amphibian, and spider bites; human, "fight," and insect stings/tick exposures were excluded. Demographics, injury site and structures involved, management (operative vs non-operative), microbiology, complications, readmissions, and length of stay (LOS) were extracted using a standardised proforma. Early presentation was defined as <24 hours post-injury. Descriptive statistics were used. Results We included 168 patients. A total of 158 (94.0%) were adults; 89 (53.0%) were females; and the mean age was 49 years. Early presentation occurred in 88 (52.4%); LOS 2.6 vs 2.9 days for delayed. Domestic animals accounted for 166 (98.8%) injuries, dogs (110, 65.5%) and cats (56, 33.3%). Upper limb involvement predominated, 160 (95.2%); hand injuries were most common, 128 (76.2%). Structural damage included 11 (6.5%) open fractures, 15 (8.9%) tendon, 14 (8.3%) muscle, seven (4.2%) nerve, and two (1.2%) vascular injuries. Dog bites accounted for all open fractures and all neurovascular injuries, and most tendon (11, 73.3%) and muscle (11, 78.6%) trauma; multi-limb injuries were dog-related in 16 (88.9%). Overall, 109 (64.9%) underwent surgery and 12 (7.1%) required reoperation. Microbiology was obtained in 82 (48.8%); 41 (50.0%) were culture-negative.
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.