dc.contributor.author | Matre, Kjell | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Havelin, Leif Ivar | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Gjertsen, Jan-Erik | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Espehaug, Birgitte | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Fevang, Jonas Meling | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2013-12-13T09:09:50Z | |
dc.date.available | 2013-12-13T09:09:50Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2013-04-01 | eng |
dc.identifier.issn | 0009-921X | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/1956/7600 | |
dc.description.abstract | Background Sliding hip screws (SHSs) and intramedullary (IM) nails are well-documented implants for simple two-part intertrochanteric fractures; however, there is no consensus regarding which type of implant is better. Questions/purposes We asked whether patients with simple two-part intertrochanteric fractures treated with IM nailing had (1) a lower reoperation rate and (2) less pain and better quality of life than patients treated with SHSs. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | eng | eng |
dc.publisher | Springer | eng |
dc.relation.ispartof | <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1956/7583" target="blank">Treatment of trochanteric and subtrochanteric hip fractures: Sliding hip screw or intramedullary nail?</a> | eng |
dc.rights | Attribution CC BY | eng |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ | eng |
dc.title | Intramedullary Nails Result in More Reoperations Than Sliding Hip Screws in Two-part Intertrochanteric Fractures | en_US |
dc.type | Peer reviewed | |
dc.type | Journal article | |
dc.description.version | publishedVersion | en_US |
dc.rights.holder | The Author(s) 2012. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com | |
dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-012-2728-2 | |
dc.identifier.cristin | 988845 | |
dc.source.journal | Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research | |
dc.source.40 | 471 | |
dc.source.14 | 4 | |
dc.source.pagenumber | 1379-1386 | |