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
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
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.


Dettagli sul finanziamento della pubblicazione +
Finanziamento:
Not Reported
Conflicts:
None disclosed

Rischio di pregiudizio

7,5/10

Criteri di segnalazione

13/20

Indice di fragilità

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?

Sì = 1

Incerto = 0,5

Non rilevante = 0

No = 0

La valutazione dei criteri di segnalazione valuta la trasparenza con cui gli autori riportano le caratteristiche metodologiche e sperimentali dello studio all'interno della pubblicazione. La valutazione è suddivisa in cinque categorie che vengono presentate di seguito.

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 di Fragilità è uno strumento che aiuta l'interpretazione dei risultati significativi, fornendo una misura della forza di un risultato. L'Indice di Fragilità rappresenta il numero di eventi consecutivi che devono essere aggiunti a un risultato dicotomico per rendere il risultato non più significativo. Un numero piccolo rappresenta un risultato più debole, mentre un numero grande rappresenta un risultato più forte.

Perché questo studio era necessario ora?

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.

Qual era la domanda di ricerca principale?

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

Caratteristiche dello studio +
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
Quali erano i risultati importanti?
  • 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%)
Che cosa devo ricordare di più?

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.

Come influenzerà l'assistenza ai miei pazienti?

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.

DISCLAIMER

Il contenuto di questa pagina è solo a scopo informativo e non intende sostituire la consulenza, la diagnosi o il trattamento medico professionale. Se ha bisogno di cure mediche, si rivolga sempre al suo medico o al pronto soccorso più vicino. Le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista espressi dalle persone sui contenuti presenti in questa pagina non riflettono le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista di OrthoEvidence.

0 di 4 articoli mensili GRATUITI sbloccati
Ha raggiunto il suo limite di 4 visualizzazioni di articoli gratuiti questo mese

Accesso a OrthoEvidence a soli 1,99 dollari a settimana.

Rimanga in contatto con le ultime prove. Può disdire in qualsiasi momento.
  • Valutazioni critiche dei più recenti studi randomizzati controllati ad alto impatto e delle revisioni sistematiche in ortopedia.
  • Accesso ai contenuti del podcast OrthoEvidence, tra cui collaborazioni con il Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviste con chirurghi di fama internazionale e tavole rotonde su notizie e argomenti ortopedici.
  • Abbonamento a The Pulse, una newsletter bisettimanale basata sulle evidenze scientifiche, progettata per aiutarla a prendere decisioni cliniche migliori.
Upgrade
Bentornato!
Ha dimenticato la password?
Inizi la sua prova gratuita oggi stesso!

Il suo account sarà affiliato a
e includerà l'accesso gratuito a OrthoEvidence


O
Ha dimenticato la password?

O
Controlli la sua e-mail

Se esiste un account con l'indirizzo e-mail fornito, le verrà inviata un'e-mail di reimpostazione della password. Se non vede l'e-mail, controlli la cartella spam o posta indesiderata.

Per ulteriore assistenza, contatti il nostro team di supporto.

Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Tradurre il Rapporto ACE

OrthoEvidence utilizza un servizio di traduzione di terze parti per rendere i contenuti accessibili in più lingue. Si prega di notare che, sebbene venga fatto ogni sforzo per garantire l'accuratezza, le traduzioni potrebbero non essere sempre perfette.

Come citare questo documento 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/

Copiare la citazione
Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Funzionalità per i membri Premium

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence Premium.

Condividi questo articolo ACE Report