• Ann Emerg Med · Apr 2023

    Meta Analysis

    A Systematic Review With Pairwise and Network Meta-analysis of Closed Reduction Methods for Anterior Shoulder Dislocation.

    • Shiro Gonai, Daisuke Yoneoka, Takahiro Miyoshi, and Katharina da Silva Lopes.
    • St Luke's International University Graduate School of Public Health, Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, Japan. Electronic address: gonaishiro@gmail.com.
    • Ann Emerg Med. 2023 Apr 1; 81 (4): 453465453-465.

    Study ObjectiveTo review closed reduction methods for anterior shoulder dislocation and perform the first comprehensive comparison of the individual methods in terms of success rate, pain, and reduction time.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials registered until December 31, 2020. We performed a pairwise and network meta-analysis using a Bayesian random-effects model. Two authors independently performed screening and risk-of-bias assessment.ResultsWe found 14 studies with 1,189 patients. In a pairwise meta-analysis, no significant difference was found in the only comparable pair, namely, the Kocher method versus the Hippocratic method (success rate: odds ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53, 2.75: pain during reduction [visual analog scale]: standard mean difference, -0.33; 95% CI, -0.69, 0.02; reduction time [minutes]: mean difference, 0.19, 95% CI, -1.77, 2.15). In network meta-analysis, FARES (Fast, Reliable, and Safe) was the only method significantly less painful than the Kocher method (mean difference, -4.0; 95% credible interval, -7.6, -0.40). In the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) plot of success rate, FARES, and the Boss-Holzach-Matter/Davos method showed high values. For pain during reduction, FARES had the highest SUCRA value in the overall analysis. In the SUCRA plot of reduction time, modified external rotation and FARES had high values. The only complication was 1 case of fracture with the Kocher method.ConclusionOverall, Boss-Holzach-Matter/Davos, and FARES demonstrated the most favorable value for success rates, whereas both FARES and modified external rotation were more favorable in reduction times. FARES had the most favorable SUCRA for pain during reduction. Future work directly comparing techniques is needed to better understand the difference in reduction success and complications.Copyright © 2022 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…