FARES method reduces acute anterior dislocations of the shoulder .
This report has been verified
by one or more authors of the
original publication.
This study has been identified as potentially high impact.
OE's AI-driven High Impact metric estimates the influence a paper is likely to have by integrating signals from both the journal in which it is published and the scientific content of the article itself.
Developed using state-of-the-art natural language processing, the OE High Impact model more accurately predicts a study's future citation performance than journal impact factor alone.
This enables earlier recognition of clinically meaningful research and helps readers focus on articles most likely to shape future practice.
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2013;1(2):188 J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009 Dec;91(12):2775-82.154 patients with acute anterior dislocation of the glenohumeral joint were randomized to receive either FARES (fast, reliable, safe) reduction, Hippocratic method reduction, or Kocher method reduction. This trial evaluated the efficacy of the FARES reduction method and compared it to the two common methods currently in use. The results from this trial indicated that the FARES method of glenohumeral joint reduction was significantly more efficacious, faster, and associated with less pain when compared to the Kocher and Hippocratic methods.
Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?
Was allocation adequately concealed?
Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?
Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?
Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?
Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?
Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?
Yes = 1
Uncertain = 0.5
Not Relevant = 0
No = 0
The Reporting Criteria Assessment evaluates the transparency with which authors report the methodological and trial characteristics of the trial within the publication. The assessment is divided into five categories which are presented below.
3/4
Randomization
3/4
Outcome Measurements
4/4
Inclusion / Exclusion
4/4
Therapy Description
3/4
Statistics
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
The Fragility Index is a tool that aids in the interpretation of significant findings, providing a measure of strength for a result. The Fragility Index represents the number of consecutive events that need to be added to a dichotomous outcome to make the finding no longer significant. A small number represents a weaker finding and a large number represents a stronger finding.
Why was this study needed now?
Anterior dislocations of the glenohumeral joint are common. Although several methods of reduction of anterior dislocations of the shoulder exist, few studies have compared efficacy, safety, and reliability of the different techniques. In this study, a new method of reduction of acute anterior shoulder dislocations was compared to the Hippocratic and Kocher methods.
What was the principal research question?
In patients with acute anterior dislocation of the glenohumeral joint, are FARES, Hippocratic, and Kocher reduction methods comparable in terms of efficacy and pain?
- Reduction was achieved for 88.7% (47) patients in the FARES group; 72.5% (37) patients in the Hippocratic method and for 68% (34) in Kocher group. Efficacy significantly favored the FARES technique (p=0.033)
- Reduction was significantly faster with the FARES method, as compared to the other two methods (FARES, time in minutes, 2.36 ± 1.24; Hippocratic, 5.55 ± 1.58; Kocher, 4.32 ± 2.12) (p<0.001)
- Pain was significantly milder when reduction was performed using the FARES technique (VAS scores: FARES, scale 0-9, 1.57 ± 1.43; Hippocratic, 4.88 ± 2.17; Kocher, 5.44 ± 1.92) (p<0.001)
What should I remember most?
The FARES method was found to be significantly more effective, faster, and less painful when compared to the Hippocratic and Kocher methods of reduction for anterior glenohumeral dislocation. Moreover, the technique was performed by only one physician and was applicable to anterior shoulder and simple fracture-dislocations.
How will this affect the care of my patients?
FARES method appears to be the optimal technique to reduce anterior dislocations of the glenohumeral joint in terms of efficiency and pain. Further trials should be conducted with larger sample sizes, which are accompanied with longer follow-ups to fully evaluate FARES method of reduction.
DISCLAIMER
This content found on this page is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. If you require medical treatment, always seek the advice of your physician or go to your nearest emergency department. The opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints expressed by the individuals on the content found on this page do not reflect the opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints of OrthoEvidence.
0 of 4 monthly FREE articles unlocked
