ReviewBulletin of the Hospital for Joint Disease (2013)2026
War, what is it good for? orthopedics the evolution of orthopedic surgery through armed conflict.
Review in Bulletin of the Hospital for Joint Disease (2013), 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractOrthopedic surgery has advanced through the demands of managing complex musculoskeletal trauma on the battlefield. The purpose of this review was to briefly summarize how successive conflicts have shaped principles and practice of orthopedic surgery-from wound management, fracture stabilization, limb salvage, prosthetics, and trauma systems-and to outline possible orthopedic input in future warfare and human exploration. From early empiricism in the Revolutionary War to organized military hospital systems in the Civil War, to the use of antibiotics and internal fixation in World War II, each armed conflict has introduced core orthopedic tenets and innovations. World War I introduced improvements in wound care and early femoral fracture stabilization (Thomas splint), dramatically reducing mortality. World War II brought on the innovation of Küntscher intramedullary nailing and the birth of hand surgery. The Korean and Vietnam wars accelerated evacuation and echeloned care, laying groundwork for damage control orthopedics. In Iraq and Afghanistan, tiered trauma systems and prospective outcomes data reframed limb salvage vs. amputation; contemporary prosthetics (targeted muscle reinnervation, myoelectric control, osseointegration) further expanded function. Future domains-remote warfare and space medicine-pose distinct challenges and research imperatives. Orthopedic surgery's evolution is inseparable from the history of war. Lessons in physiology-first care, principles of bony fixation, wound care, infection control, and multidisciplinary rehabilitation continue to inform modern civilian practice and will be essential for managing complexing injuries in emerging environments. hand, rehabilitation, spine, trauma.
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.