ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Distal radius fractures reduction and immobilization using a novel device in older adults in emergency department.
Article in Frontiers in 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The purpose of this study was to introduce a new device for the reduction and immobilization of distal radius fractures. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 40 patients aged 65 years or older who had been treated for displaced distal radius fractures between January 1 and December 31, 2023. Patients were grouped according to the treatment documented in their medical records: conventional manual closed reduction and cast immobilization ( Results: The groups had equal distribution in age, gender, injured side, classification of fracture. Volar tilt (Vt), and Ulnar variance (Uv) were better in device group at each follow-up point, Radial inclination (Ri) and Radial length (Rl) were similar at 6-month and 1-year follow-up. Wrist flexion, extension and pronation were better in device group at 6-month and 1-year follow-up. DASH scores were better in device group at 6-month follow-up and similar at 1-year follow-up. Skin damage, neurovascular injury and tenosynovitis did not occur in any patients. Conclusion: The device is convenient and effective for reduction of distal radius fractures. For our future work, we propose to improve the device to incorporate control by artificial intelligence and to reduce the size and weight to more accurately and intelligently control the device and make it easier to carry and operate.
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.