A systematic comparison of the closed shoulder reduction techniques
Purpose To identify the optimal technique for closed reduction for shoulder instability, based on success rates, reduction time, complication risks, and pain level. Methods A PubMed and EMBASE query was performed, screening all relevant literature of closed reduction techniques mentioning the succes...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery 2017-05, Vol.137 (5), p.589-599 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 599 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 589 |
| container_title | Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery |
| container_volume | 137 |
| creator | Alkaduhimi, H. van der Linde, J. A. Willigenburg, N. W. van Deurzen, D. F. P. van den Bekerom, M. P. J. |
| description | Purpose
To identify the optimal technique for closed reduction for shoulder instability, based on success rates, reduction time, complication risks, and pain level.
Methods
A PubMed and EMBASE query was performed, screening all relevant literature of closed reduction techniques mentioning the success rate written in English, Dutch, German, and Arabic. Studies with a fracture dislocation or lacking information on success rates for closed reduction techniques were excluded. We used the modified Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) to assess the quality of included studies and excluded studies with a poor methodological quality (CMS |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00402-017-2648-4 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1873721772</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2261891497</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-74ce8b04a79471582c81f09394527b36e323e20ef62b30849fffc97bbaf398273</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMotlZ_gBdZ8OJldfLRTXIsxS8oeNFz2E0ndsvupia7B_-9WVoVBE8ZyDPvOzyEXFK4pQDyLgIIYDlQmbNCqFwckSkVXORc0-KYTEHzIlcwpxNyFuMWgDKl4ZRMmGLzNMOULBdZ_Iw9tmVf28z6dleGOvou8y7rN5jZxkdcZ3Hjh2aNIQu4HmxfJ6BHu-nqjwHjOTlxZRPx4vDOyNvD_evyKV-9PD4vF6vccsn6XAqLqgJRSi0knStmFXXpRC3mTFa8QM44MkBXsIqDEto5Z7WsqtJxrZjkM3Kzz90FP_b2pq2jxaYpO_RDNFTJVESlZAm9_oNu_RC6dJ1hrKBKU6HHQLqnbPAxBnRmF-q2DJ-GghkNm71hkwyb0bARaefqkDxULa5_Nr6VJoDtgZi-uncMv9X_p34BVcuEkQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2261891497</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A systematic comparison of the closed shoulder reduction techniques</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Alkaduhimi, H. ; van der Linde, J. A. ; Willigenburg, N. W. ; van Deurzen, D. F. P. ; van den Bekerom, M. P. J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Alkaduhimi, H. ; van der Linde, J. A. ; Willigenburg, N. W. ; van Deurzen, D. F. P. ; van den Bekerom, M. P. J.</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
To identify the optimal technique for closed reduction for shoulder instability, based on success rates, reduction time, complication risks, and pain level.
Methods
A PubMed and EMBASE query was performed, screening all relevant literature of closed reduction techniques mentioning the success rate written in English, Dutch, German, and Arabic. Studies with a fracture dislocation or lacking information on success rates for closed reduction techniques were excluded. We used the modified Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) to assess the quality of included studies and excluded studies with a poor methodological quality (CMS < 50). Finally, a meta-analysis was performed on the data from all studies combined.
Results
2099 studies were screened for their title and abstract, of which 217 studies were screened full-text and finally 13 studies were included. These studies included 9 randomized controlled trials, 2 retrospective comparative studies, and 2 prospective non-randomized comparative studies. A combined analysis revealed that the scapular manipulation is the most successful (97%), fastest (1.75 min), and least painful reduction technique (VAS 1,47); the “Fast, Reliable, and Safe” (FARES) method also scores high in terms of successful reduction (92%), reduction time (2.24 min), and intra-reduction pain (VAS 1.59); the traction-countertraction technique is highly successful (95%), but slower (6.05 min) and more painful (VAS 4.75).
Conclusion
For closed reduction of anterior shoulder dislocations, the combined data from the selected studies indicate that scapular manipulation is the most successful and fastest technique, with the shortest mean hospital stay and least pain during reduction. The FARES method seems the best alternative.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0936-8051</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1434-3916</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00402-017-2648-4</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28251280</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Comparative Effectiveness Research ; Humans ; Joint Instability - therapy ; Manipulation, Orthopedic - methods ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Orthopaedic Surgery ; Orthopedics ; Pain ; Shoulder Dislocation - therapy ; Success</subject><ispartof>Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2017-05, Vol.137 (5), p.589-599</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017</rights><rights>Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery is a copyright of Springer, (2017). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-74ce8b04a79471582c81f09394527b36e323e20ef62b30849fffc97bbaf398273</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-74ce8b04a79471582c81f09394527b36e323e20ef62b30849fffc97bbaf398273</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00402-017-2648-4$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00402-017-2648-4$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28251280$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Alkaduhimi, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Linde, J. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willigenburg, N. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Deurzen, D. F. P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van den Bekerom, M. P. J.</creatorcontrib><title>A systematic comparison of the closed shoulder reduction techniques</title><title>Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery</title><addtitle>Arch Orthop Trauma Surg</addtitle><addtitle>Arch Orthop Trauma Surg</addtitle><description>Purpose
To identify the optimal technique for closed reduction for shoulder instability, based on success rates, reduction time, complication risks, and pain level.
Methods
A PubMed and EMBASE query was performed, screening all relevant literature of closed reduction techniques mentioning the success rate written in English, Dutch, German, and Arabic. Studies with a fracture dislocation or lacking information on success rates for closed reduction techniques were excluded. We used the modified Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) to assess the quality of included studies and excluded studies with a poor methodological quality (CMS < 50). Finally, a meta-analysis was performed on the data from all studies combined.
Results
2099 studies were screened for their title and abstract, of which 217 studies were screened full-text and finally 13 studies were included. These studies included 9 randomized controlled trials, 2 retrospective comparative studies, and 2 prospective non-randomized comparative studies. A combined analysis revealed that the scapular manipulation is the most successful (97%), fastest (1.75 min), and least painful reduction technique (VAS 1,47); the “Fast, Reliable, and Safe” (FARES) method also scores high in terms of successful reduction (92%), reduction time (2.24 min), and intra-reduction pain (VAS 1.59); the traction-countertraction technique is highly successful (95%), but slower (6.05 min) and more painful (VAS 4.75).
Conclusion
For closed reduction of anterior shoulder dislocations, the combined data from the selected studies indicate that scapular manipulation is the most successful and fastest technique, with the shortest mean hospital stay and least pain during reduction. The FARES method seems the best alternative.</description><subject>Comparative Effectiveness Research</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Joint Instability - therapy</subject><subject>Manipulation, Orthopedic - methods</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Orthopaedic Surgery</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Pain</subject><subject>Shoulder Dislocation - therapy</subject><subject>Success</subject><issn>0936-8051</issn><issn>1434-3916</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMotlZ_gBdZ8OJldfLRTXIsxS8oeNFz2E0ndsvupia7B_-9WVoVBE8ZyDPvOzyEXFK4pQDyLgIIYDlQmbNCqFwckSkVXORc0-KYTEHzIlcwpxNyFuMWgDKl4ZRMmGLzNMOULBdZ_Iw9tmVf28z6dleGOvou8y7rN5jZxkdcZ3Hjh2aNIQu4HmxfJ6BHu-nqjwHjOTlxZRPx4vDOyNvD_evyKV-9PD4vF6vccsn6XAqLqgJRSi0knStmFXXpRC3mTFa8QM44MkBXsIqDEto5Z7WsqtJxrZjkM3Kzz90FP_b2pq2jxaYpO_RDNFTJVESlZAm9_oNu_RC6dJ1hrKBKU6HHQLqnbPAxBnRmF-q2DJ-GghkNm71hkwyb0bARaefqkDxULa5_Nr6VJoDtgZi-uncMv9X_p34BVcuEkQ</recordid><startdate>20170501</startdate><enddate>20170501</enddate><creator>Alkaduhimi, H.</creator><creator>van der Linde, J. A.</creator><creator>Willigenburg, N. W.</creator><creator>van Deurzen, D. F. P.</creator><creator>van den Bekerom, M. P. J.</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170501</creationdate><title>A systematic comparison of the closed shoulder reduction techniques</title><author>Alkaduhimi, H. ; van der Linde, J. A. ; Willigenburg, N. W. ; van Deurzen, D. F. P. ; van den Bekerom, M. P. J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-74ce8b04a79471582c81f09394527b36e323e20ef62b30849fffc97bbaf398273</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Comparative Effectiveness Research</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Joint Instability - therapy</topic><topic>Manipulation, Orthopedic - methods</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Orthopaedic Surgery</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Pain</topic><topic>Shoulder Dislocation - therapy</topic><topic>Success</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Alkaduhimi, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Linde, J. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willigenburg, N. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Deurzen, D. F. P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van den Bekerom, M. P. J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Alkaduhimi, H.</au><au>van der Linde, J. A.</au><au>Willigenburg, N. W.</au><au>van Deurzen, D. F. P.</au><au>van den Bekerom, M. P. J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A systematic comparison of the closed shoulder reduction techniques</atitle><jtitle>Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery</jtitle><stitle>Arch Orthop Trauma Surg</stitle><addtitle>Arch Orthop Trauma Surg</addtitle><date>2017-05-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>137</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>589</spage><epage>599</epage><pages>589-599</pages><issn>0936-8051</issn><eissn>1434-3916</eissn><abstract>Purpose
To identify the optimal technique for closed reduction for shoulder instability, based on success rates, reduction time, complication risks, and pain level.
Methods
A PubMed and EMBASE query was performed, screening all relevant literature of closed reduction techniques mentioning the success rate written in English, Dutch, German, and Arabic. Studies with a fracture dislocation or lacking information on success rates for closed reduction techniques were excluded. We used the modified Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) to assess the quality of included studies and excluded studies with a poor methodological quality (CMS < 50). Finally, a meta-analysis was performed on the data from all studies combined.
Results
2099 studies were screened for their title and abstract, of which 217 studies were screened full-text and finally 13 studies were included. These studies included 9 randomized controlled trials, 2 retrospective comparative studies, and 2 prospective non-randomized comparative studies. A combined analysis revealed that the scapular manipulation is the most successful (97%), fastest (1.75 min), and least painful reduction technique (VAS 1,47); the “Fast, Reliable, and Safe” (FARES) method also scores high in terms of successful reduction (92%), reduction time (2.24 min), and intra-reduction pain (VAS 1.59); the traction-countertraction technique is highly successful (95%), but slower (6.05 min) and more painful (VAS 4.75).
Conclusion
For closed reduction of anterior shoulder dislocations, the combined data from the selected studies indicate that scapular manipulation is the most successful and fastest technique, with the shortest mean hospital stay and least pain during reduction. The FARES method seems the best alternative.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>28251280</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00402-017-2648-4</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0936-8051 |
| ispartof | Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2017-05, Vol.137 (5), p.589-599 |
| issn | 0936-8051 1434-3916 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1873721772 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals |
| subjects | Comparative Effectiveness Research Humans Joint Instability - therapy Manipulation, Orthopedic - methods Medicine Medicine & Public Health Orthopaedic Surgery Orthopedics Pain Shoulder Dislocation - therapy Success |
| title | A systematic comparison of the closed shoulder reduction techniques |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T11%3A50%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20systematic%20comparison%20of%20the%20closed%20shoulder%20reduction%20techniques&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20orthopaedic%20and%20trauma%20surgery&rft.au=Alkaduhimi,%20H.&rft.date=2017-05-01&rft.volume=137&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=589&rft.epage=599&rft.pages=589-599&rft.issn=0936-8051&rft.eissn=1434-3916&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00402-017-2648-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2261891497%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2261891497&rft_id=info:pmid/28251280&rfr_iscdi=true |