Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 321

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Locking Intramedullary Nailing with and without Reaming for Open Fractures of the Tibial Shaft. A Prospective, Randomized Study*

KEATING, J. F., OʼBRIEN, P. J., BLACHUT, P. A., MEEK, R. N., BROEKHUYSE, H. M.·1997·The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery

Abstract

Ninety-one patients who had ninety-four open fractures of the tibial shaft were randomized into two treatment groups. Fifty fractures (nine type-I, eighteen type-II, sixteen type-IIIA, and seven type-IIIB fractures, according to the classification of Gustilo et al.) were treated with nailing after reaming, and forty-four fractures (five type-I, sixteen type-II, nineteen type-IIIA, and four type-IIIB fractures) were treated with nailing without reaming. The average diameter of the nail was 11.5 millimeters (range, nine to fourteen millimeters) in the group treated with reaming and 9.2 millimeters (range, eight to ten millimeters) in the group treated without reaming. Follow-up information was adequate for forty-five patients (forty-seven fractures) who had been managed with reaming and forty patients (forty-one fractures) who had been managed without reaming. No clinically important differences were found between the two groups with regard to the technical aspects of the procedure or the rate of early postoperative complications. The average time to union was thirty weeks (range, thirteen to seventy-two weeks) in the group treated with reaming and twenty-nine weeks (range, thirteen to fifty weeks) in the group treated without reaming. Four (9 per cent) of the fractures treated with reaming and five (12 per cent) of the fractures treated without reaming did not unite (p = 0.73). There were two infections in the group treated with reaming and one in the group treated without reaming. Significantly more screws broke in the group treated without reaming (twelve; 29 per cent) than in the group treated with reaming (four; 9 per cent) (p = 0.014). There was no difference between the two groups with regard to the frequency of broken nails (two nails that had been inserted after reaming broke, compared with one that had been inserted without reaming). The functional outcome, in terms of pain in the knee, range of motion, return to work, and recreational activity, did not differ significantly between the groups. We concluded that the clinical and radiographic results of nailing after reaming are similar to those of nailing without reaming for fixation of open fractures of the tibial shaft, although more screws broke when reaming had not been done.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2106/00004623-199703000-00003

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 9 references

Cited by

See all 321

Metadata

Authors
KEATING, J. F., OʼBRIEN, P. J., BLACHUT, P. A., MEEK, R. N., & BROEKHUYSE, H. M.
Venue
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery
Published
1997-03
Volume
79
Issue
3
Pages
334-41
ISSN
0021-9355 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W37591249
Cited by
321
References
9
FWCI
5.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Locking Intramedullary Nailing with and without Reaming for Open Fractures of the Tibial Shaft. A Prospective, Randomized Study*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2106/00004623-199703000-00003
The paper
KEATING, J. F., OʼBRIEN, P. J., BLACHUT, P. A., MEEK, R. N., & BROEKHUYSE, H. M. (1997). Locking Intramedullary Nailing with and without Reaming for Open Fractures of the Tibial Shaft. A Prospective, Randomized Study*. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199703000-00003

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.