ACE Report Cover
Comparison between operative and nonoperative treatment for proximal humerus fractures
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Langue
Download Download Download
Télécharger
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citer
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favoris
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Langue
Download Download Download
Télécharger
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citer
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favoris
TRAUMA
Comparison between operative and nonoperative treatment for proximal humerus fractures .

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2015;3(20):32 Acta Orthop. 2015 Jun;86(3):280-5.

9 studies (8 RCTs, 1 controlled clinical trial) were selected for a systematic review of elderly patients with a proximal humerus fracture. The goal of this study was to determine whether surgical or nonoperative treatment is the optimal intervention in patients over the age of 60. Operative treatments identified in the included trials were the tension band technique, locking plates, pinning and hemiarthroplasty. The results of this review indicated that many studies did not find a significant difference in functional outcomes when comparing locking plates or tension bands to nonoperative treatment at 1 year. There was a significantly better health-related quality of life and Euroqol-5D in patients that received a hemiarthroplasty compared to the nonoperative group for patients with 4-part fractures. Complications were common in the operative treatment groups. This study highlights the need for further high quality investigations.


Détails du financement de la publication +
Financement:
Not Reported
Conflicts:
None disclosed

Risque de partialité

7,5/10

Critères de déclaration

13/20

Indice de fragilité

N/A

Were the search methods used to find evidence (original research) on the primary question or questions stated?

Was the search for evidence reasonably comprehensive?

Were the criteria used for deciding which studies to include in the overview reported?

Was the bias in the selection of studies avoided?

Were the criteria used for assessing the validity of the included studies reported?

Was the validity of all of the studies referred to in the text assessed with use of appropriate criteria (either in selecting the studies for inclusion or in analyzing the studies that were cited)?

Were the methods used to combine the findings of the relevant studies (to reach a conclusion) reported?

Were the findings of the relevant studies combined appropriately relative to the primary question that the overview addresses?

Were the conclusions made by the author or authors supported by the data and or analysis reported in the overview?

How would you rate the scientific quality of this evidence?

Oui = 1

Incertain = 0,5

Non pertinent = 0

Non = 0

L'évaluation des critères de rapport permet d'évaluer la transparence avec laquelle les auteurs rapportent les caractéristiques méthodologiques et les caractéristiques de l'essai dans la publication. L'évaluation est divisée en cinq catégories qui sont présentées ci-dessous.

4/4

Introduction

4/4

Accessing Data

2/4

Analysing Data

1/4

Results

2/4

Discussion

Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65

L'indice de fragilité est un outil qui aide à l'interprétation des résultats significatifs, en fournissant une mesure de la force d'un résultat. L'indice de fragilité représente le nombre d'événements consécutifs qui doivent être ajoutés à un résultat dichotomique pour que le résultat ne soit plus significatif. Un petit nombre représente un résultat plus faible et un grand nombre un résultat plus fort.

Pourquoi cette étude était-elle nécessaire maintenant ?

As the growing population ages, the incidence of osteoporotic trauma will also grow. Among the more common of these fractures are those of the proximal humerus. There is little high-quality evidence comparing the various methods of treatment, which also have a high degree of variation between practitioners. Previous literature reviews have not focused on proximal humerus fractures associated with osteoporosis, and with new literature published, there is a need for an updated assessment.

Quelle était la principale question de recherche ?

What were the effects of various surgical treatments of osteoporotic proximal humerus fractures on function, disability, and complications in elderly patients?

Caractéristiques de l'étude +
Data Source:
An online search from 1946 to 2012 of the databases Ovid, MEDLINE, and Scopus was performed.
Index Terms:
Index terms used were: "shoulder fractures", "proximal humeral fracture", and "rehabilitation, surgery, therapy".
Study Selection:
Studies were selected for inclusion if patients received a surgical treatment in comparison to any other method of treatment in patients older than 60 years with a 2, 3, or 4 part proximal humerus fracture caused by trauma. The studies had to report a function score, disability score, or quality of life outcome with minimum 1 year follow-up. All studies had to be randomized controlled trials, or controlled clinical trials. 9 studies (with 409 patients), comprised of 8 RCTs and 1 controlled clinical trial, were selected for final inclusion by three authors independently.
Data Extraction:
Data was extracted by 1 author using a data sheet template. The extraction was reviewed by 2 authors independently.
Data Synthesis:
None performed
Quels sont les résultats importants ?
  • Studies investigated the use of surgical treatments which included the tension band technique (1 study), locking plates (3 studies), hemiarthroplasty (3 studies) and MIROS pinning (1 study).
  • A comparison of tension band to nonoperative treatment found that there was no significant difference in Constant score after 1 year
  • Studies comparing locking plate fixation to nonoperative treatment found no difference in Constant score (2 studies), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder score (1 study), Disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) score (1 study) or health-related quality of life (2 studies) at one year.
  • 1 study found no differences between monaxial and polyaxial constructions in locking plates in constant score, DASH and simple shoulder test.
  • One study comparing hemiarthroplasty with nonoperative treatment in patients with 4 part fractures found that hemiarthroplasty had a significantly better EQ-5D, but no significant difference was found for DASH or Constant score after 2 years
  • Another study comparing hemiarthroplasty and nonoperative treatment found no significant difference for Constant score, simple shoulder test, or visual analogue scale after 12 months
  • One study comparing hemiarthroplasty devices (Epoca, Depuy Synthesis and HAS, Stryker) found that the individual Constant score and the regular Constant score were in favor of the Epoca prosthesis; 2 infections were reported for the Epoca group
  • Complications were common with operative care (10-29%) as well as reoperation rates (16-30%)
De quoi dois-je me souvenir en priorité ?

Many of the studies found no significant difference between the functional outcomes for operative and nonoperative treatment of proxmial humerus fractures in patients over the age of 60. Many studies reported high complication rates in the operative group. Both tension band and locking plate systems did not provide significant benefits over nonoperative treatment. Treatment of 4-part fractures with hemiarthroplasty found that HRQoL and EQ-5D was significantly better than nonoperative treatment, but the complication rates were high.

Comment cela affectera-t-il les soins prodigués à mes patients ?

The results from this study indicate the operative treatments such as tension band and locking plate systems did not provide significant benefits over nonoperative treatment, and while hemi arthroplasty my provide some benefit there were concerns relating to the number of complications. The study highlights the need for further high quality investigations into the treatment of 3-4 part humeral fractures that use standardized reporting that will allow for meta-analysis.

AVIS DE NON-RESPONSABILITÉ

Le contenu de cette page est fourni à titre d'information uniquement et n'est pas destiné à remplacer un avis médical, un diagnostic ou un traitement professionnel. Si vous avez besoin d'un traitement médical, demandez toujours l'avis de votre médecin ou rendez-vous au service des urgences le plus proche. Les opinions, croyances et points de vue exprimés par les individus sur le contenu de cette page ne reflètent pas les opinions, croyances et points de vue d'OrthoEvidence.

0 de 4 articles mensuels GRATUITS débloqués
Vous avez atteint votre limite de 4 vues d'articles gratuits ce mois-ci

Accédez à OrthoEvidence pour seulement 1,99 $ par semaine.

Restez informé des dernières données. Annulez à tout moment.
  • Évaluations critiques des derniers essais contrôlés randomisés à fort impact et des revues systématiques en orthopédie.
  • Accès au contenu des podcasts OrthoEvidence, y compris les collaborations avec le Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, les entretiens avec des chirurgiens de renommée internationale et les tables rondes sur l'actualité et les sujets orthopédiques.
  • Abonnement à The Pulse, une lettre d'information bihebdomadaire fondée sur des données probantes, conçue pour vous aider à prendre de meilleures décisions cliniques.
Upgrade
Bienvenue à nouveau !
Vous avez oublié votre mot de passe ?
Commencez votre essai GRATUIT dès aujourd'hui !

Votre compte sera affilié à
et inclut un accès gratuit à OrthoEvidence.


OU
Vous avez oublié votre mot de passe ?

OU
Veuillez vérifier votre adresse électronique

Si un compte existe avec l'adresse e-mail fournie, un e-mail de réinitialisation du mot de passe vous sera envoyé. Si vous ne voyez pas d'e-mail, veuillez vérifier votre dossier de spam ou de courrier indésirable.

Pour plus d'assistance, contactez notre équipe d'assistance.

Veuillez vous connecter pour activer cette fonction

Pour accéder à cette fonctionnalité, vous devez être connecté à un compte OrthoEvidence actif. Veuillez vous connecter ou créer un compte d'essai GRATUIT.

Traduire le rapport ACE

OrthoEvidence utilise un service de traduction tiers pour rendre le contenu accessible dans plusieurs langues. Veuillez noter que même si tous les efforts sont faits pour assurer l'exactitude, les traductions ne sont pas toujours parfaites.

Comment citer ce document ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. Comparison between operative and nonoperative treatment for proximal humerus fractures. OE Journal. 2015;3(20):32. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/

Copier la citation
Veuillez vous connecter pour activer cette fonction

Pour accéder à cette fonctionnalité, vous devez être connecté à un compte OrthoEvidence actif. Veuillez vous connecter ou créer un compte d'essai GRATUIT.

Fonctionnalité Membre Premium

Pour accéder à cette fonctionnalité, vous devez être connecté à un compte Premium OrthoEvidence.

Partager ACE Report