ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2026
Association of Charlson Comorbidity Index and Charlson Fracture Index With Surgical Complications in Distal Radius Fractures: A Retrospective Review.
Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 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
Purpose: To assess and compare the associative value of comorbidity fracture-specific index (CFI) versus the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) in identifying patients at risk for early complications after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of distal radius fractures (DRFs). Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study including patients ≥40 years who underwent ORIF for closed DRF using a volar locking plate with a minimum of 1 year follow-up. CCI and CFI scores were calculated based on comorbidities over the prior 15 years. The primary outcome was 90-day postoperative complications. We used logistic regression to compare CCI and CFI and their association with complications, adjusting for age, sex, smoking status, and ethnicity. We used Pearson correlation and the intraclass correlation coefficient to assess the relationship and agreement between CCI and CFI. Results: Among the 317 patients, 16.7% (n = 53) experienced complications. There were no statistically significant differences in CCI or CFI in patients with and without complications. After adjusting for covariates, each increase by 1 in CCI and CFI, increased the odds of complications; however, these effects were not statistically significant. CCI and CFI were strongly correlated and showed high agreement. Conclusions: CCI and CFI scores did not significantly differ between patients with and without complications after DRF and were not significantly associated with postoperative complications after adjusting for covariates. The strong correlation and agreement between CCI and CFI suggest they capture a similar comorbidity burden in this patient population. Neither CCI nor CFI demonstrated good discriminative ability in identifying patients at risk for early complications after ORIF of DRF. Type of study/level of evidence: Prognostic IV.
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.