{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015957446808510637, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007978723404255319, 'mean_word_length': 5.4147727272727275, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Compass Elbow Hinge: Indications and Initial Results

The Compass Elbow Hinge uses Illizarov’s methods of fixation to externally hold the elbow reduced and allow both passive and active motion. Eleven patients with degenerative disease, contracture or instability were treated with the Compass Elbow Hinge and were retrospectively evaluated at an average follow-up of 29 months (range: 18–62 months). One was lost to follow-up. Patients with degenerative changes underwent fascia lata interposition while those treated for contractures underwent anterior and posterior capsular release with or without fascia lata interposition. Those with elbow instability underwent ligament reconstruction. The device was removed after 6 weeks and seven of the 11 patients were satisfied with the outcome of the operation. Stability could not be achieved in two patients with coronoid fractures that were not reconstructed. One patient did not tolerate the device and requested its removal with subsequent subluxation. We conclude that patient selection and compliance are key elements in achieving a satisfactory outcome with the device.