A Multicenter Randomized Control Trial Comparing a Novel Intramedullary Device (InterTAN) Versus Conventional Treatment (Sliding Hip Screw) of Geriatric Hip Fractures
OBJECTIVES:To compare outcomes in elderly patients with intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with either the sliding hip screw (SHS) or InterTAN intramedullary device (IT). DESIGN:Prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trial. SETTING:Five level 1 trauma centers. PATIENTS:Two hundred forty-...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of orthopaedic trauma 2017-01, Vol.31 (1), p.1-8 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 8 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | Journal of orthopaedic trauma |
container_volume | 31 |
creator | Sanders, David Bryant, Dianne Tieszer, Christina Lawendy, Abdel-Rahman MacLeod, Mark Papp, Steven Liew, Allan Viskontas, Darius Coles, Chad Gurr, Kevin Carey, Tim Gofton, Wade Bailey, Chris Bartley, Debra Trenholm, Andrew Stone, Trevor Leighton, Ross Foxall, Julia Zomar, Mauri Trask, Kelly |
description | OBJECTIVES:To compare outcomes in elderly patients with intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with either the sliding hip screw (SHS) or InterTAN intramedullary device (IT).
DESIGN:Prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trial.
SETTING:Five level 1 trauma centers.
PATIENTS:Two hundred forty-nine patients 55 years of age or older with AO/OTA 31A1 (43) and OA/OTA 31A2 (206) fractures were prospectively enrolled and followed for 12 months.
INTERVENTION:Computer generated randomization to either IT (n = 123) or SHS (n = 126).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS:The Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and the Timed Up and Go test (TUG) were used to measure function and motor performance. Secondary outcome measures included femoral shortening, complications, and mortality.
RESULTS:Demographics, comorbidities, preinjury FIM scores and TUG scores were similar between groups. Patients (17.2%) who received an IT had limb shortening greater than 2 cm compared with 42.9% who received an SHS (P < 0.001). To determine the importance of preinjury function and fracture stability, we analyzed the subgroup of patients with the ability to walk 150 m independently preinjury and an OA/OTA 31A-2 fracture (n = 70). In this subgroup, patients treated with SHS had greater shortening and demonstrated poorer FIM and TUG scores compared with patients treated with an IT.
CONCLUSIONS:Overall, most patients with intertrochanteric femur fractures can expect similar functional results whether treated with an intramedullary or extramedullary device. However, active, functional patients have an improved outcome when the InterTAN is used to treat their unstable intertrochanteric fracture.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000713 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1835504771</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1835504771</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4223-6d1184a16bafe9c0937ed457353349966fb88f924f76b3e79bc9e5a0737702d53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1O3DAUhS3UqkynfQNUeTksQv2TxPFyOvyNREEqA9vIcW7ArRMPdjKj9oH6nDgMVKgLvLHu9bnflc9B6ICSI0qk-PrtanVEXh9B-R6a0IzThDFJ36EJKSRJMs7lPvoYws-oKQhjH9A-EyLnMism6O8cfx9sbzR0PXj8Q3W1a80fqPHCdb13Fq-8UTZW7Vp5091hhS_dBixexmfVQj1Yq_xvfAybCMGz5chZzS8P8S34MISRs4lw4zo1wkD1bSzx7NqaeuSdmzW-1h62h9g1-Aziut4b_dQ_9Ur3g4fwCb1vlA3w-fmeopvTk9XiPLm4Olsu5heJThnjSV5TWqSK5pVqQGoiuYA6zQSPJqRS5nlTFUUjWdqIvOIgZKUlZIoILgRhdcanaLbjrr17GCD0ZWuChvjFDtwQSlrwLCOpiF5PUbqTau9C8NCUa2_aaEVJSTkmVMaEyv8TimNfnjcMVXTv39BLJFFQ7ARbZ6OV4ZcdtuDLe1C2v3-b_Qh4up3n</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1835504771</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Multicenter Randomized Control Trial Comparing a Novel Intramedullary Device (InterTAN) Versus Conventional Treatment (Sliding Hip Screw) of Geriatric Hip Fractures</title><source>Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload</source><source>MEDLINE</source><creator>Sanders, David ; Bryant, Dianne ; Tieszer, Christina ; Lawendy, Abdel-Rahman ; MacLeod, Mark ; Papp, Steven ; Liew, Allan ; Viskontas, Darius ; Coles, Chad ; Gurr, Kevin ; Carey, Tim ; Gofton, Wade ; Bailey, Chris ; Bartley, Debra ; Trenholm, Andrew ; Stone, Trevor ; Leighton, Ross ; Foxall, Julia ; Zomar, Mauri ; Trask, Kelly</creator><creatorcontrib>Sanders, David ; Bryant, Dianne ; Tieszer, Christina ; Lawendy, Abdel-Rahman ; MacLeod, Mark ; Papp, Steven ; Liew, Allan ; Viskontas, Darius ; Coles, Chad ; Gurr, Kevin ; Carey, Tim ; Gofton, Wade ; Bailey, Chris ; Bartley, Debra ; Trenholm, Andrew ; Stone, Trevor ; Leighton, Ross ; Foxall, Julia ; Zomar, Mauri ; Trask, Kelly</creatorcontrib><description>OBJECTIVES:To compare outcomes in elderly patients with intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with either the sliding hip screw (SHS) or InterTAN intramedullary device (IT).
DESIGN:Prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trial.
SETTING:Five level 1 trauma centers.
PATIENTS:Two hundred forty-nine patients 55 years of age or older with AO/OTA 31A1 (43) and OA/OTA 31A2 (206) fractures were prospectively enrolled and followed for 12 months.
INTERVENTION:Computer generated randomization to either IT (n = 123) or SHS (n = 126).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS:The Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and the Timed Up and Go test (TUG) were used to measure function and motor performance. Secondary outcome measures included femoral shortening, complications, and mortality.
RESULTS:Demographics, comorbidities, preinjury FIM scores and TUG scores were similar between groups. Patients (17.2%) who received an IT had limb shortening greater than 2 cm compared with 42.9% who received an SHS (P < 0.001). To determine the importance of preinjury function and fracture stability, we analyzed the subgroup of patients with the ability to walk 150 m independently preinjury and an OA/OTA 31A-2 fracture (n = 70). In this subgroup, patients treated with SHS had greater shortening and demonstrated poorer FIM and TUG scores compared with patients treated with an IT.
CONCLUSIONS:Overall, most patients with intertrochanteric femur fractures can expect similar functional results whether treated with an intramedullary or extramedullary device. However, active, functional patients have an improved outcome when the InterTAN is used to treat their unstable intertrochanteric fracture.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0890-5339</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-2291</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000713</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27763958</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Copyright Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</publisher><subject>Activities of Daily Living ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Bone Screws - utilization ; Canada - epidemiology ; Equipment Failure Analysis ; Female ; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary - instrumentation ; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary - utilization ; Fracture Healing ; Geriatric Assessment - statistics & numerical data ; Hip Fractures - mortality ; Hip Fractures - surgery ; Humans ; Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Prevalence ; Prosthesis Design ; Range of Motion, Articular ; Recovery of Function ; Risk Factors ; Survival Rate ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Journal of orthopaedic trauma, 2017-01, Vol.31 (1), p.1-8</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4223-6d1184a16bafe9c0937ed457353349966fb88f924f76b3e79bc9e5a0737702d53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4223-6d1184a16bafe9c0937ed457353349966fb88f924f76b3e79bc9e5a0737702d53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27763958$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sanders, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bryant, Dianne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tieszer, Christina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lawendy, Abdel-Rahman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MacLeod, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Papp, Steven</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liew, Allan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Viskontas, Darius</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coles, Chad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gurr, Kevin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carey, Tim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gofton, Wade</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bailey, Chris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bartley, Debra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trenholm, Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stone, Trevor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leighton, Ross</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Foxall, Julia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zomar, Mauri</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trask, Kelly</creatorcontrib><title>A Multicenter Randomized Control Trial Comparing a Novel Intramedullary Device (InterTAN) Versus Conventional Treatment (Sliding Hip Screw) of Geriatric Hip Fractures</title><title>Journal of orthopaedic trauma</title><addtitle>J Orthop Trauma</addtitle><description>OBJECTIVES:To compare outcomes in elderly patients with intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with either the sliding hip screw (SHS) or InterTAN intramedullary device (IT).
DESIGN:Prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trial.
SETTING:Five level 1 trauma centers.
PATIENTS:Two hundred forty-nine patients 55 years of age or older with AO/OTA 31A1 (43) and OA/OTA 31A2 (206) fractures were prospectively enrolled and followed for 12 months.
INTERVENTION:Computer generated randomization to either IT (n = 123) or SHS (n = 126).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS:The Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and the Timed Up and Go test (TUG) were used to measure function and motor performance. Secondary outcome measures included femoral shortening, complications, and mortality.
RESULTS:Demographics, comorbidities, preinjury FIM scores and TUG scores were similar between groups. Patients (17.2%) who received an IT had limb shortening greater than 2 cm compared with 42.9% who received an SHS (P < 0.001). To determine the importance of preinjury function and fracture stability, we analyzed the subgroup of patients with the ability to walk 150 m independently preinjury and an OA/OTA 31A-2 fracture (n = 70). In this subgroup, patients treated with SHS had greater shortening and demonstrated poorer FIM and TUG scores compared with patients treated with an IT.
CONCLUSIONS:Overall, most patients with intertrochanteric femur fractures can expect similar functional results whether treated with an intramedullary or extramedullary device. However, active, functional patients have an improved outcome when the InterTAN is used to treat their unstable intertrochanteric fracture.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</description><subject>Activities of Daily Living</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Bone Screws - utilization</subject><subject>Canada - epidemiology</subject><subject>Equipment Failure Analysis</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary - instrumentation</subject><subject>Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary - utilization</subject><subject>Fracture Healing</subject><subject>Geriatric Assessment - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Hip Fractures - mortality</subject><subject>Hip Fractures - surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Prevalence</subject><subject>Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Range of Motion, Articular</subject><subject>Recovery of Function</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Survival Rate</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0890-5339</issn><issn>1531-2291</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1O3DAUhS3UqkynfQNUeTksQv2TxPFyOvyNREEqA9vIcW7ArRMPdjKj9oH6nDgMVKgLvLHu9bnflc9B6ICSI0qk-PrtanVEXh9B-R6a0IzThDFJ36EJKSRJMs7lPvoYws-oKQhjH9A-EyLnMism6O8cfx9sbzR0PXj8Q3W1a80fqPHCdb13Fq-8UTZW7Vp5091hhS_dBixexmfVQj1Yq_xvfAybCMGz5chZzS8P8S34MISRs4lw4zo1wkD1bSzx7NqaeuSdmzW-1h62h9g1-Aziut4b_dQ_9Ur3g4fwCb1vlA3w-fmeopvTk9XiPLm4Olsu5heJThnjSV5TWqSK5pVqQGoiuYA6zQSPJqRS5nlTFUUjWdqIvOIgZKUlZIoILgRhdcanaLbjrr17GCD0ZWuChvjFDtwQSlrwLCOpiF5PUbqTau9C8NCUa2_aaEVJSTkmVMaEyv8TimNfnjcMVXTv39BLJFFQ7ARbZ6OV4ZcdtuDLe1C2v3-b_Qh4up3n</recordid><startdate>201701</startdate><enddate>201701</enddate><creator>Sanders, David</creator><creator>Bryant, Dianne</creator><creator>Tieszer, Christina</creator><creator>Lawendy, Abdel-Rahman</creator><creator>MacLeod, Mark</creator><creator>Papp, Steven</creator><creator>Liew, Allan</creator><creator>Viskontas, Darius</creator><creator>Coles, Chad</creator><creator>Gurr, Kevin</creator><creator>Carey, Tim</creator><creator>Gofton, Wade</creator><creator>Bailey, Chris</creator><creator>Bartley, Debra</creator><creator>Trenholm, Andrew</creator><creator>Stone, Trevor</creator><creator>Leighton, Ross</creator><creator>Foxall, Julia</creator><creator>Zomar, Mauri</creator><creator>Trask, Kelly</creator><general>Copyright Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201701</creationdate><title>A Multicenter Randomized Control Trial Comparing a Novel Intramedullary Device (InterTAN) Versus Conventional Treatment (Sliding Hip Screw) of Geriatric Hip Fractures</title><author>Sanders, David ; Bryant, Dianne ; Tieszer, Christina ; Lawendy, Abdel-Rahman ; MacLeod, Mark ; Papp, Steven ; Liew, Allan ; Viskontas, Darius ; Coles, Chad ; Gurr, Kevin ; Carey, Tim ; Gofton, Wade ; Bailey, Chris ; Bartley, Debra ; Trenholm, Andrew ; Stone, Trevor ; Leighton, Ross ; Foxall, Julia ; Zomar, Mauri ; Trask, Kelly</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4223-6d1184a16bafe9c0937ed457353349966fb88f924f76b3e79bc9e5a0737702d53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Activities of Daily Living</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Bone Screws - utilization</topic><topic>Canada - epidemiology</topic><topic>Equipment Failure Analysis</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary - instrumentation</topic><topic>Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary - utilization</topic><topic>Fracture Healing</topic><topic>Geriatric Assessment - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Hip Fractures - mortality</topic><topic>Hip Fractures - surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Prevalence</topic><topic>Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Range of Motion, Articular</topic><topic>Recovery of Function</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Survival Rate</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sanders, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bryant, Dianne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tieszer, Christina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lawendy, Abdel-Rahman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MacLeod, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Papp, Steven</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liew, Allan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Viskontas, Darius</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coles, Chad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gurr, Kevin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carey, Tim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gofton, Wade</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bailey, Chris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bartley, Debra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trenholm, Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stone, Trevor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leighton, Ross</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Foxall, Julia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zomar, Mauri</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trask, Kelly</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of orthopaedic trauma</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sanders, David</au><au>Bryant, Dianne</au><au>Tieszer, Christina</au><au>Lawendy, Abdel-Rahman</au><au>MacLeod, Mark</au><au>Papp, Steven</au><au>Liew, Allan</au><au>Viskontas, Darius</au><au>Coles, Chad</au><au>Gurr, Kevin</au><au>Carey, Tim</au><au>Gofton, Wade</au><au>Bailey, Chris</au><au>Bartley, Debra</au><au>Trenholm, Andrew</au><au>Stone, Trevor</au><au>Leighton, Ross</au><au>Foxall, Julia</au><au>Zomar, Mauri</au><au>Trask, Kelly</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Multicenter Randomized Control Trial Comparing a Novel Intramedullary Device (InterTAN) Versus Conventional Treatment (Sliding Hip Screw) of Geriatric Hip Fractures</atitle><jtitle>Journal of orthopaedic trauma</jtitle><addtitle>J Orthop Trauma</addtitle><date>2017-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>8</epage><pages>1-8</pages><issn>0890-5339</issn><eissn>1531-2291</eissn><abstract>OBJECTIVES:To compare outcomes in elderly patients with intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with either the sliding hip screw (SHS) or InterTAN intramedullary device (IT).
DESIGN:Prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trial.
SETTING:Five level 1 trauma centers.
PATIENTS:Two hundred forty-nine patients 55 years of age or older with AO/OTA 31A1 (43) and OA/OTA 31A2 (206) fractures were prospectively enrolled and followed for 12 months.
INTERVENTION:Computer generated randomization to either IT (n = 123) or SHS (n = 126).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS:The Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and the Timed Up and Go test (TUG) were used to measure function and motor performance. Secondary outcome measures included femoral shortening, complications, and mortality.
RESULTS:Demographics, comorbidities, preinjury FIM scores and TUG scores were similar between groups. Patients (17.2%) who received an IT had limb shortening greater than 2 cm compared with 42.9% who received an SHS (P < 0.001). To determine the importance of preinjury function and fracture stability, we analyzed the subgroup of patients with the ability to walk 150 m independently preinjury and an OA/OTA 31A-2 fracture (n = 70). In this subgroup, patients treated with SHS had greater shortening and demonstrated poorer FIM and TUG scores compared with patients treated with an IT.
CONCLUSIONS:Overall, most patients with intertrochanteric femur fractures can expect similar functional results whether treated with an intramedullary or extramedullary device. However, active, functional patients have an improved outcome when the InterTAN is used to treat their unstable intertrochanteric fracture.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Copyright Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</pub><pmid>27763958</pmid><doi>10.1097/BOT.0000000000000713</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0890-5339 |
ispartof | Journal of orthopaedic trauma, 2017-01, Vol.31 (1), p.1-8 |
issn | 0890-5339 1531-2291 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1835504771 |
source | Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload; MEDLINE |
subjects | Activities of Daily Living Aged Aged, 80 and over Bone Screws - utilization Canada - epidemiology Equipment Failure Analysis Female Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary - instrumentation Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary - utilization Fracture Healing Geriatric Assessment - statistics & numerical data Hip Fractures - mortality Hip Fractures - surgery Humans Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data Male Middle Aged Prevalence Prosthesis Design Range of Motion, Articular Recovery of Function Risk Factors Survival Rate Treatment Outcome |
title | A Multicenter Randomized Control Trial Comparing a Novel Intramedullary Device (InterTAN) Versus Conventional Treatment (Sliding Hip Screw) of Geriatric Hip Fractures |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T13%3A46%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Multicenter%20Randomized%20Control%20Trial%20Comparing%20a%20Novel%20Intramedullary%20Device%20(InterTAN)%20Versus%20Conventional%20Treatment%20(Sliding%20Hip%20Screw)%20of%20Geriatric%20Hip%20Fractures&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20orthopaedic%20trauma&rft.au=Sanders,%20David&rft.date=2017-01&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=8&rft.pages=1-8&rft.issn=0890-5339&rft.eissn=1531-2291&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/BOT.0000000000000713&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1835504771%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1835504771&rft_id=info:pmid/27763958&rfr_iscdi=true |