SynthesisArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2026
Patient-reported outcomes after surgery for isolated radial head fractures: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe optimal surgical treatment of displaced isolated radial head fractures remains unclear and patient-reported outcomes have not been comprehensively evaluated. In this systematic review, we aimed to compare patient-reported pain, function, and return to work outcomes following open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), radial head excision, and radial head arthroplasty (RHA) in patients with isolated radial head fractures.
methodsFour electronic databases were searched for the period from January 2000 to August 2023 to identify studies comparing surgical management interventions for isolated radial head fractures. Standard methods were used for title, abstract and full-text screening and data extraction, applying PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Risk of bias was assessed using standardised checklists.
resultsEleven studies were eligible for inclusion. The mean age of participants across the studies ranged from 36 to 65 years, with almost equal gender distribution across 434 participants. Ten studies showed a high risk of bias due to methodological concerns. Follow-up periods ranged from 12 to 84 months post-operatively. Across the included studies, 179 participants (41%) underwent RHA, 139 (32%) underwent ORIF and 116 (27%) underwent excision arthroplasty. Seven studies included patient-reported functional outcomes with relatively better function for ORIF and RHA than excision arthroplasty, eight studies reported patient-reported pain outcomes with similar pain scores across the groups and only one study reported a return to work outcome showing no difference between groups. Significant variation in comparator groups and outcome instruments precluded meta-analysis.
conclusionsThis review demonstrates the paucity of high-quality evidence on patient-reported outcomes after surgical management of isolated radial head fractures. There is currently no evidence to indicate any surgical treatment modality is superior with regard to patient-reported outcomes, given the limited number of studies, substantial outcome measure variation and the inherent high risk of bias in existing studies.
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.