ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024
Are all cases of floating hip the same? Further understanding of floating hip.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2024. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeFloating hip is a severe high-energy injury. Femoral fracture is an essential component of floating hip. However, few studies have addressed the relationship between the femoral fracture pattern and floating hip injury. In this study, we reviewed and summarized the epidemiological and clinical data of patients with floating hip. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed patients with a diagnosis of floating hip at our trauma center from January 2014 to December 2021. Data on patient demographics, characteristics of the injuries, associated injuries, whether sciatic nerve palsy (SNP) occurred, the number of operations performed, and the total length of hospital stay were analyzed.
resultsA total of 76 patients met the diagnostic criteria for floating hip, 45 of whom had proximal femoral fractures. The mean Injury Severity Scores in patients with proximal and non-proximal femoral fractures were 21.47 ± 10.67 and 17.61 ± 7.64, respectively, and the mean Abbreviated Injury Scale scores were 13.31 ± 9.71 and 9.52 ± 4.32, respectively. Motor vehicle collision and a fall from a height were the main causes of injury. Chest injury was the most common associated injury. Twenty-two patients were diagnosed with SNP, 17 of whom had a proximal femoral fracture. Of the patients with pelvic fractures, 15 were diagnosed with SNP, 14 of whom also had a proximal femoral fracture. Of the patients with acetabular fractures, seven were diagnosed with SNP, three of whom also had a proximal femoral fracture.
conclusionMore than half of patients with floating hips have a combined proximal femoral fracture. In this study, fracture of the pelvis or acetabulum combined with a proximal femoral fracture had a higher AIS score and higher risk of SNP than fracture of the pelvis or acetabulum combined with a non-proximal femoral fracture. Patients with a single pelvic fracture showed similar results, but patients with a single acetabular fracture did not. A pelvic or acetabular fracture combined with a proximal femoral fracture has a different outcome than a mid-distal femoral fracture, which may be a "true" floating hip.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.