致编辑的信，内容涉及“股骨颈系统与空心加压螺钉治疗股骨颈骨折的比较：单中心回顾性队列研究”。
Letter to the editor regarding "Comparison of femoral neck system versus cannulated cancellous screws for the fixation of femoral neck fracture: a single‑center retrospective cohort study".
机构信息
Department of Orthopedic, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.
Department of Orthopedic, Binhai New Area Hospital of TCM, Tianjin, China.
出版信息
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2024 Aug;34(6):3215-3216. doi: 10.1007/s00590-024-04080-9. Epub 2024 Aug 29.
PURPOSE
To improve the scientificity and accuracy of this study.
METHOD
We studied the research methods of the article by carefully reading the author 's article and consulting the relevant literature.
RESULT
The authors performed an excellent and meaningful work, finding that FNS appeared advantageous over CCS in Harris Hip Scores (HHS), operative time, and reoperation rates, providing clinicians with a basis for selecting internal fixation methods. It is a useful reference, but there are still some problems.
CONCLUSION
In order to improve the scientific nature of the study, we believe that some aspects may need to be improved.
目的
提高本研究的科学性和准确性。
方法
通过仔细阅读作者文章并查阅相关文献，研究了本文的研究方法。
结果
作者进行了一项出色且有意义的工作，发现 FNS 在 Harris 髋关节评分（HHS）、手术时间和再次手术率方面优于 CCS，为临床医生选择内固定方法提供了依据。这是一个有用的参考，但仍存在一些问题。
结论
为了提高研究的科学性，我们认为有些方面可能需要改进。
Zotero 插件