2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.hansur.2020.10.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Classification and clinical evaluation of "spare parts" procedures in mutilating hand injuries

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Table (8) shows predictors of operative grading and we found that the electrophysiological grading was the first predictor, clinical grading is the second and sonographic grading is the third predictor in order, electrophysiological grading was shown to be the only statistically significant predictor of intraoperative grading.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Table (8) shows predictors of operative grading and we found that the electrophysiological grading was the first predictor, clinical grading is the second and sonographic grading is the third predictor in order, electrophysiological grading was shown to be the only statistically significant predictor of intraoperative grading.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…Many studies have tried to assess the validity of these diagnostic methods in determination of the severity of CTS, in an effort to come out with a standard indication of surgical intervention [4][5][6][7][8][9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The following ratings have been used to evaluate patient satisfaction as regard covering of the defect, cosmetic result of the flap and donor site morbidity on a five-point scale on a five-point scale: (1) unsatisfied, (2) slightly satisfied, (3) moderately satisfied, (4) quite satisfied, and (5) completely satisfied [6].…”
Section: Surgical Interventionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We estimated the blood loss according to the number and amount of gauze swabs soaked. Patient satisfaction was assessed on a five-point scale (Abdelshaheed, 2021), which included the following ratings: (1) not satisfied, (2) slightly satisfied, (3) moderately satisfied, (4) quite a bit satisfied and (5) extremely satisfied. Patients were asked if they would prefer the same technique if they needed to have hand surgery again.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%