Prospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Orthop. Mar 18, 2022; 13(3): 297-306
Published online Mar 18, 2022. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v13.i3.297
Table 1 The range value of variables analyzed for the study group
Age (yr)
Female
Men
CLASS 1 (70-74)301
CLASS 2 (75-80)153
CLASS 3 (80-85)131
Total 585
Table 2 Analysis of the fracture pattern
TotalThree-part fractures Four-part fractures
Number634122
Table 3 Analysis of distribution considering age class and fracture personality

Age class (yr)
Neer classification70-7575-8080-90
Three-part fractures10274
Four-part fractures5710
Table 4 Postoperative clinical and psychological mean values at T0 follow-up

Group A
Group B
DASH50.854.6
CONSTANT36.132.0
GAD-75.46.4
CSS5.06.2
Table 5 Description of clinical and psychological scores at T1 follow-up

Group A
Group B
DASH42.139.1
CONSTANT47.343.2
GAD-74.35.7
CSS3.95.5
Table 6 Analysis of clinical and psychological scores at T2 follow-up

Group A
Group B
DASH32.833.6
CONSTANT60.052.9
GAD-73.24.3
CSS3.14.5
Table 7 Group C clinical and psychological mean values at three different follow-ups

DASH
CONSTANT
GAD-7
CSS
T051.133.25.95.7
T138.846.94.94.5
T229.965.53.13.0
Table 8 Score distribution between treatment open reduction and internal fixation and PI

TO
T1
T2
O.R.I.F. (n = 31)
RSA (n = 32)
P value
O.R.I.F. (n = 31)
RSA (n = 32)
P value
O.R.I.F. (n = 31)
RSA (n = 32)
P value
DASH 50.0 (7.5)57.5 (7.0)0.002 45.0 (12.5)36.5 (12.3)0.25630.0 (24.0) 32.0 (5.5)0.587
CONSTANT38.0 (7.5)31.5 (6.0)0.00848.0 (19.0)42.0 (7.3)0.11060.0 (31.0) 51.0 (5.8)0.049
GAD-75.0 (2.5)6.0 (2.3)0.0154.0 (2.5)6.0 (2.0)0.0023.0 (3.0)4.0 (1.3)0.012
CSS5.0 (2.0)6.5 (2.3) 0.0084.0 (2.5)6.0 (1.3) 0.0013.0 (2.5) 4.0 (2.3)0.005
Table 9 Comparison between surgical and conservative treatment
n = 32
T0
P value
T1
P value
T2
P value
DASH53 (44.5)0.34439 (35)0.42130 (26)0.014
CONSTANT32 (30)0.22348.5 (42)0.06365.5 (60)< 0.001
GAD-76 (5)0.8275 (3.3)0.5483 (2)0.002
CSS6 (5)0.4815 (3)0.0903 (2)0.001