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):795-80060 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.
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)?
はい = 1
不確実＝0.5
無関係 = 0
いいえ = 0
報告基準評価では、著者が出版物内で試験の方法論的特徴や試験特性を報告する際の透明性を評価します。評価は以下の5つのカテゴリーに分類されます。
4/4
Randomização
3/4
Medidas de resultado
2/4
Inclusão/Exclusão
4/4
Descrição do tratamento
4/4
Estatística
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
Fragility Indexは、重要な所見の解釈を助けるツールで、結果の強さの尺度を提供します。Fragility Indexは、その所見が有意でなくなるために、二項対立の結果に追加する必要がある連続した事象の数を表します。数値が小さいほど弱い所見を表し、数値が大きいほど強い所見を表します。
なぜ今この研究が必要なのですか？
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.
主な研究課題は何ですか？
How does the efficacy of shoulder reduction treatment with the Oxford chair compare to a conventional shoulder reduction treatment?
重要な知見は？
- 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.
最も覚えておくべきことは？
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.
それが私の患者ケアにどのように影響するか？
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.
免責事項
このページに記載されている内容は、情報提供のみを目的としたものであり、専門的な医療アドバイス、診断、治療の代わりとなるものではありません。治療が必要な場合は、必ず医師の診断を仰ぐか、最寄りの救急外来を受診してください。このページに記載されている内容に関して個人が表明した意見、信念、見解は、OrthoEvidenceの意見、信念、見解を反映するものではありません。
0の4 月間無料記事のロック解除
