ACE Report Cover
Oxford chair vs. traditional treatment of acute shoulder dislocation
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

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

Auteurs contributeurs

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.


Détails du financement de la publication +
Financement:
Non-Industry funded
Sponsor:
Hong Kong College of Emergency Medicine Research Grant
Conflits:
None disclosed

Risque de partialité

6,5/10

Critères de déclaration

17/20

Indice de fragilité

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)?

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

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

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 ?

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.

Quelle était la principale question de recherche ?

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

Caractéristiques de l'étude +
Population:
60 patients, > 18 years of age, with a diagnosis of anterior or posterior glenohumeral shoulder dislocation who were at least 150 cm tall.
Intervention:
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).
Comparaison:
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).
Résultats:
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.
Méthodes:
RCT: Single Center
Durée de l'intervention:
Measurements were taken until patients were discharged from the emergency department.

Quels sont les résultats importants ?

  • 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.
De quoi dois-je me souvenir en priorité ?

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.

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

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.

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
Close Dialog
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. 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

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