ACE Report Cover
Oxford chair vs. traditional treatment of acute shoulder dislocation
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
اللغة
Download Download Download
تحميل
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
اقتباس
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ المفضلة
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
اللغة
Download Download Download
تحميل
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
اقتباس
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ المفضلة

TRAUMA

The effectiveness of a specially designed shoulder chair for closed reduction of acute shoulder dislocation in the emergency department: a randomised control trial

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2014;2(1):31 Emerg Med J. 2013 Oct;30(10):795-800

المؤلفون المساهمون

JY Chung CH Cheng CA Graham TH Rainer

60 patients, over 18 years of age, who were diagnosed with anterior or posterior glenohumeral shoulder dislocation were randomly assigned into one of two groups to compare the efficacy of shoulder reduction treatment with the Oxford chair (group 1) to a traditional shoulder reduction treatment (group 2). Results of the study indicated that there were no differences between the groups with regards to length of stay in the emergency department, procedure time, or pain experienced before or after treatments were completed. However, a significant difference in success rate was found, favouring the traditional treatment group over the Oxford chair method.


تفاصيل تمويل المنشور +
التمويل:
Non-Industry funded
الراعي:
Hong Kong College of Emergency Medicine Research Grant
التعارضات:
None disclosed

مخاطر التحيز

6٫5/10

معايير الإبلاغ

17/20

مؤشر الهشاشة

N/A

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)?

نعم = 1

غير مؤكد = 0.5

غير ذي صلة = 0

لا = 0

يقيّم تقييم معايير الإبلاغ الشفافية التي يبلغ بها المؤلفون عن الخصائص المنهجية والتجريبية للتجربة في المنشور. ينقسم التقييم إلى خمس فئات معروضة أدناه.

4/4

Randomization

3/4

Outcome Measurements

2/4

Inclusion / Exclusion

4/4

Therapy Description

4/4

Statistics

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

مؤشر الهشاشة هو أداة تساعد في تفسير النتائج المهمة، وتوفر مقياسًا لقوة النتيجة. ويمثل مؤشر الهشاشة عدد الأحداث المتتالية التي يجب إضافتها إلى نتيجة ثنائية التفرع لجعل النتيجة غير مهمة. يمثل الرقم الصغير نتيجة أضعف ويمثل الرقم الكبير نتيجة أقوى.

لماذا كانت هناك حاجة لهذه الدراسة الآن؟

Acute shoulder dislocation is a common occurrence that often leads to treatment in the emergency department. A variety of managements currently exist for shoulder dislocation, but no single method has been shown to be superior to another, and most require analgesia or sedation to reduce the pain experienced during the treatment. Shoulder reduction without anesthesia has been discussed as a possible alternative by various studies, and multiple reports have been completed attempting to demonstrate a painless procedure without any premedication. Patient comfort and relaxation are influential factors in a successful shoulder reduction, and a new shoulder reduction method using a specifically designed chair (Oxford Chair), potentially offers this to patients receiving the procedure. The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy of shoulder reduction treatment with the Oxford chair to a conventional shoulder reduction treatment.

ما هو سؤال البحث الرئيسي؟

How does the efficacy of shoulder reduction treatment with the Oxford chair compare to a conventional shoulder reduction treatment?

خصائص الدراسة +
السكان:
60 patients, > 18 years of age, with a diagnosis of anterior or posterior glenohumeral shoulder dislocation who were at least 150 cm tall.
التدخل:
Shoulder chair group: Patients in this group had their shoulder reduction performed by emergency physicians or nurse practitioners. Sedation was not administered due to concerns about its use in unsupported patients in a sitting position. A video clip demonstrating the technique used for the Oxford chair was provided as training material and hands on practice included. The front rest of the chair was positioned at a 45 degree angle, and patients were instructed to sit on the chair with there anterior chest wall laying prone on the front rest. The affected arm was rested with the axilla placed over the tip of the front rest and relaxation techniques performed (dimmed lights and soft talking). Once the patient was relaxed, the treating doctor or nurse grasped the patients forearm and applied longitudinal traction in conjunction with gravity. The operator was allowed to apply gentle external rotation to the shoulder in order to facilitate joint reduction. Patients were treated with the traditional method after three attempts or if they asked to be sedated. (Mean age: 43.7 +/-22.51, n= 30, 30 completed follow up, F=17/M=13).
المقارنة:
Traditional practice group: Patients in this group received any recognised method for closed reduction according to the emergency clinicians' preference and clinical judgement. Kocher's manoeuver was suggested as a primary reduction technique by the authors of the study, but this did not mean that all patients were treated with that method. Oral Paracetamol (1g) and rescue analgesia of intravenous morphine (2mg) was given to patients on request (Mean age: 50.1 +/- 23.15, n=30, 30 completed follow up, F=10/M=20).
النتائج:
The primary outcome measured in this study was the length of patient stay in the emergency department. The secondary outcomes measured in this study were: length of procedure, successful reduction rate, and pain levels experienced before and after treatment.
الأساليب:
RCT: Single Center
الوقت:
Measurements were taken until patients were discharged from the emergency department.

ما هي النتائج المهمة؟

  • 7 failed reductions occurred in the Oxford chair group following treatment. These patients went on to have successful reduction with the traditional method. Only 1 patient failed reduction in the traditional method group.
  • Median length of stay in the emergency department was 152 min in the oxford chair group compared to 173 min in the traditional group, however this difference was not significant (p=0.183)
  • Median procedure time was 3 min in the oxford chair group compared to 5 min in the traditional group (p=0.179).
  • When comparing groups on a per-protocol basis, a significantly shorter procedure time for the Oxford chair group was found compared to the traditional treatment group (2 min vs. 6 min, respectively) (p<0.001).
  • Success rate was 97% for the traditional group and 77% in the Oxford chair group, showing a significantly higher success rate in the traditional treatment group (p=0.023).
  • No differences between the groups was shown regarding average pain experienced at baseline, 30 min after oral analgesic, during the procedure, or at discharge (p>0.05).
  • When patients who experienced successful reduction in their first treatment were compared between groups, it was found that patients in the Oxford chair group had significantly less time to reduction (2 min vs. 5 min) (p=0.008), and length of stay (125 min vs. 180) (p=0.025) than those in the traditional treatment group.
ما الذي يجب أن أتذكره أكثر؟

Median length of stay and median procedure time was not significantly different between groups. The success rate for the oxford chair was significantly lower than the traditional treatment method. No statistically significant differences were found in pain score at any point.

كيف سيؤثر ذلك على رعاية مرضاي؟

Results of this study found that traditional treatment methods for shoulder reduction resulted in a significantly higher success rate than those treated with the Oxford chair method. No differences were found between treatment methods regarding length of stay, procedure time, and pain experienced before or after treatment. Patient factors, such as those who have had precious shoulder surgery or fracture dislocations may have affected the results of this study. Further research is needed to clearly identify the effect the Oxford chair treatment method on acute shoulder dislocations.

تنويه

هذا المحتوى الموجود في هذه الصفحة هو لأغراض إعلامية فقط وليس الغرض منه أن يكون بديلاً عن المشورة الطبية المتخصصة أو التشخيص أو العلاج. إذا كنت بحاجة إلى علاج طبي، اطلب دائمًا مشورة طبيبك أو اذهب إلى أقرب قسم طوارئ إليك. الآراء والمعتقدات ووجهات النظر التي يعبر عنها الأفراد في المحتوى الموجود في هذه الصفحة لا تعكس آراء ومعتقدات ووجهات نظر أورثوإيفيدنس.

0 من 4 مقالات مجانية شهرية غير مقفلة
لقد وصلت إلى الحد الأقصى لمشاهدة 4 من 4 مقالات مجانية هذا الشهر

ادخل إلى OrthoEvidence مقابل 1.99 دولارًا أمريكيًا في الأسبوع.

ابق على اتصال بأحدث الأدلة. قم بالإلغاء في أي وقت.
  • تقييمات نقدية لأحدث التجارب المعشاة ذات الشواهد عالية التأثير والمراجعات المنهجية في مجال جراحة العظام
  • الوصول إلى محتوى المدونة الصوتية OrthoEvidence، بما في ذلك التعاون مع مجلة جراحة العظام والمفاصل، والمقابلات مع الجراحين المعترف بهم دولياً، ومناقشات المائدة المستديرة حول أخبار وموضوعات جراحة العظام
  • الاشتراك في نشرة The Pulse، وهي نشرة إخبارية مبنية على الأدلة مرتين أسبوعيًا مصممة لمساعدتك على اتخاذ قرارات سريرية أفضل
Upgrade
Close Dialog
أهلاً بعودتك!
هل نسيت كلمة المرور؟
ابدأ تجربتك المجانية اليوم!

سيكون حسابك تابعًا لـ
ويتضمن وصولًا مجانيًا إلى OrthoEvidence


أو
هل نسيت كلمة المرور؟

أو
يرجى التحقق من بريدك الإلكتروني

في حالة وجود حساب بعنوان البريد الإلكتروني المقدم، سيتم إرسال بريد إلكتروني لإعادة تعيين كلمة المرور إليك. إذا كنت لا ترى بريدًا إلكترونيًا، يرجى التحقق من مجلد الرسائل غير المرغوب فيها أو البريد غير المرغوب فيه.

لمزيد من المساعدة اتصل بفريق الدعم لدينا.

يرجى تسجيل الدخول لتفعيل هذه الميزة

للوصول إلى هذه الميزة، يجب تسجيل الدخول إلى حساب OrthoEvidence نشط. يرجى تسجيل الدخول أو إنشاء حساب تجريبي مجاني.

ترجمة تقرير ACE

تستخدم OrthoEvidence خدمة ترجمة من طرف ثالث لإتاحة المحتوى بلغات متعددة. يُرجى ملاحظة أنه على الرغم من بذل كل جهد ممكن لضمان الدقة، إلا أن الترجمات قد لا تكون دائمًا مثالية.

كيفية الاستشهاد بهذا ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. Oxford chair vs. traditional treatment of acute shoulder dislocation. OE Journal. 2014;2(1):31. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/oxford-chair-vs-traditional-treatment-of-acute-shoulder-dislocation

نسخ الاقتباس
يرجى تسجيل الدخول لتفعيل هذه الميزة

للوصول إلى هذه الميزة، يجب تسجيل الدخول إلى حساب OrthoEvidence نشط. يرجى تسجيل الدخول أو إنشاء حساب تجريبي مجاني.

ميزة العضو المميز

للوصول إلى هذه الميزة، يجب عليك تسجيل الدخول إلى حساب OrthoEvidence المميز.

شارك هذا ACE Report