FARES method reduces acute anterior dislocations of the shoulder .
This report has been verified
by one or more authors of the
original publication.
Questo studio è stato identificato come potenzialmente ad alto impatto.
La metrica High Impact di OE, guidata dall'AI, stima l'influenza che un articolo potrebbe avere integrando i segnali della rivista in cui è stato pubblicato e il contenuto scientifico dell'articolo stesso.
Sviluppato utilizzando un'elaborazione del linguaggio naturale all'avanguardia, il modello High Impact di OE prevede in modo più accurato la futura performance citazionale di uno studio rispetto al solo fattore di impatto della rivista.
Ciò consente di riconoscere prima le ricerche clinicamente significative e aiuta i lettori a concentrarsi sugli articoli che hanno maggiori probabilità di influenzare la pratica futura.
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)?
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.
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
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?
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.
Qual era la domanda di ricerca principale?
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)
Che cosa devo ricordare di più?
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.
Come influenzerà l'assistenza ai miei pazienti?
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
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
