急诊科首次确诊造影的肩关节缩小成功率

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Jeffrey R. Stowell MD , Levi Filler DO , Carl Mitchell MD , Ashkon Mahmoudi MD , Thomas Whiting DO , Carl Pastore MD , Matthew Kunz DO , Murtaza Akhter MD
{"title":"急诊科首次确诊造影的肩关节缩小成功率","authors":"Jeffrey R. Stowell MD ,&nbsp;Levi Filler DO ,&nbsp;Carl Mitchell MD ,&nbsp;Ashkon Mahmoudi MD ,&nbsp;Thomas Whiting DO ,&nbsp;Carl Pastore MD ,&nbsp;Matthew Kunz DO ,&nbsp;Murtaza Akhter MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jemermed.2024.01.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Management of acute shoulder dislocation in the emergency department (ED) is common.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This study describes the rate, risk factors, and length of stay (LOS) associated with shoulder dislocation reduction failure in the ED.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The study was a retrospective case–control study of patients 18 years and older presenting to the ED with acute shoulder dislocation who underwent attempted reduction. Patients with successful reduction on post-reduction first confirmatory imaging are compared with those requiring multiple attempts.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 398 ED encounters when a shoulder reduction was attempted in the ED, 18.8% (75/398 [95% CI 15.2–22.9%]) required multiple reduction attempts. Patients with successful reduction on first confirmatory imaging were more commonly male (80.2% [95% CI 75.6–84.3%] vs. 68.0% [95% CI 56.8–77.8%]; <em>p</em> = 0.0220), discharged home from the ED (95.4% [95% CI 92.6–97.3%] vs. 84.0% [95% CI 74.4–91.0%]; <em>p</em> = 0.0004), reduced using a traction/countertraction technique (42.1% [95% CI 36.8–47.6%] vs. 29.3% [95% CI 19.9–40.4%]; <em>p</em> = 0.0415), and less likely to have a pre-reduction fracture (26.0% [95% CI 21.4–31.0%] vs. 45.3% [95% CI 34.4–56.7%]; <em>p</em> = 0.0010). Mean length of stay (LOS) for those with successful reduction on first confirmatory imaging was 2 hours and 8 minutes shorter than for those with more than one attempt (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The rate of failed first-pass reduction is higher than previously reported. Furthermore, the ED LOS was significantly longer in patients requiring multiple attempts. Knowledge of the failure rate and risk factors may raise physician awareness and guide future studies evaluating approaches for verification of reduction success.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16085,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rate of Successful Shoulder Reduction on First Confirmatory Imaging in the Emergency Department\",\"authors\":\"Jeffrey R. Stowell MD ,&nbsp;Levi Filler DO ,&nbsp;Carl Mitchell MD ,&nbsp;Ashkon Mahmoudi MD ,&nbsp;Thomas Whiting DO ,&nbsp;Carl Pastore MD ,&nbsp;Matthew Kunz DO ,&nbsp;Murtaza Akhter MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jemermed.2024.01.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Management of acute shoulder dislocation in the emergency department (ED) is common.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This study describes the rate, risk factors, and length of stay (LOS) associated with shoulder dislocation reduction failure in the ED.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The study was a retrospective case–control study of patients 18 years and older presenting to the ED with acute shoulder dislocation who underwent attempted reduction. Patients with successful reduction on post-reduction first confirmatory imaging are compared with those requiring multiple attempts.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 398 ED encounters when a shoulder reduction was attempted in the ED, 18.8% (75/398 [95% CI 15.2–22.9%]) required multiple reduction attempts. Patients with successful reduction on first confirmatory imaging were more commonly male (80.2% [95% CI 75.6–84.3%] vs. 68.0% [95% CI 56.8–77.8%]; <em>p</em> = 0.0220), discharged home from the ED (95.4% [95% CI 92.6–97.3%] vs. 84.0% [95% CI 74.4–91.0%]; <em>p</em> = 0.0004), reduced using a traction/countertraction technique (42.1% [95% CI 36.8–47.6%] vs. 29.3% [95% CI 19.9–40.4%]; <em>p</em> = 0.0415), and less likely to have a pre-reduction fracture (26.0% [95% CI 21.4–31.0%] vs. 45.3% [95% CI 34.4–56.7%]; <em>p</em> = 0.0010). Mean length of stay (LOS) for those with successful reduction on first confirmatory imaging was 2 hours and 8 minutes shorter than for those with more than one attempt (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The rate of failed first-pass reduction is higher than previously reported. Furthermore, the ED LOS was significantly longer in patients requiring multiple attempts. Knowledge of the failure rate and risk factors may raise physician awareness and guide future studies evaluating approaches for verification of reduction success.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16085,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0736467924000088\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0736467924000088","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景急诊科(ED)处理急性肩关节脱位很常见。目的本研究描述了与急诊科肩关节脱位复位失败相关的比率、风险因素和住院时间(LOS)。结果在急诊室进行肩关节复位尝试的398例患者中,18.8%(75/398;95% CI 15.2-22.9%)的患者需要进行多次复位尝试。在首次确认成像中成功缩复肩关节的患者多为男性(80.2% [95% CI 75.6-84.3%] vs 68.0% [56.8-77.8%],P= 0.0220),从急诊室出院回家的患者多为男性(95.4% [95% CI 92.6-97.3%] vs 84.0% [95% CI 74.4-91.0%],P= 0.0004),使用牵引/反牵引技术(42.1% [95% CI 36.8-47.6%] vs 29.3% [95% CI 19.9-40.4%],p= 0.0415),以及较少发生牵引前骨折(26.0% [95% CI 21.4-31.0%] vs 45.3% [95% CI 34.4-56.7%],p= 0.0010)。首次确认造影成功的患者的平均住院时间比多次尝试者缩短了 2 小时 8 分钟(p <0.001)。此外,需要多次尝试的患者的 ED LOS 明显更长。对失败率和风险因素的了解可以提高医生的认识,并为今后评估减容成功验证方法的研究提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rate of Successful Shoulder Reduction on First Confirmatory Imaging in the Emergency Department

Background

Management of acute shoulder dislocation in the emergency department (ED) is common.

Objective

This study describes the rate, risk factors, and length of stay (LOS) associated with shoulder dislocation reduction failure in the ED.

Methods

The study was a retrospective case–control study of patients 18 years and older presenting to the ED with acute shoulder dislocation who underwent attempted reduction. Patients with successful reduction on post-reduction first confirmatory imaging are compared with those requiring multiple attempts.

Results

Of 398 ED encounters when a shoulder reduction was attempted in the ED, 18.8% (75/398 [95% CI 15.2–22.9%]) required multiple reduction attempts. Patients with successful reduction on first confirmatory imaging were more commonly male (80.2% [95% CI 75.6–84.3%] vs. 68.0% [95% CI 56.8–77.8%]; p = 0.0220), discharged home from the ED (95.4% [95% CI 92.6–97.3%] vs. 84.0% [95% CI 74.4–91.0%]; p = 0.0004), reduced using a traction/countertraction technique (42.1% [95% CI 36.8–47.6%] vs. 29.3% [95% CI 19.9–40.4%]; p = 0.0415), and less likely to have a pre-reduction fracture (26.0% [95% CI 21.4–31.0%] vs. 45.3% [95% CI 34.4–56.7%]; p = 0.0010). Mean length of stay (LOS) for those with successful reduction on first confirmatory imaging was 2 hours and 8 minutes shorter than for those with more than one attempt (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The rate of failed first-pass reduction is higher than previously reported. Furthermore, the ED LOS was significantly longer in patients requiring multiple attempts. Knowledge of the failure rate and risk factors may raise physician awareness and guide future studies evaluating approaches for verification of reduction success.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Emergency Medicine
Journal of Emergency Medicine 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
339
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Emergency Medicine is an international, peer-reviewed publication featuring original contributions of interest to both the academic and practicing emergency physician. JEM, published monthly, contains research papers and clinical studies as well as articles focusing on the training of emergency physicians and on the practice of emergency medicine. The Journal features the following sections: • Original Contributions • Clinical Communications: Pediatric, Adult, OB/GYN • Selected Topics: Toxicology, Prehospital Care, The Difficult Airway, Aeromedical Emergencies, Disaster Medicine, Cardiology Commentary, Emergency Radiology, Critical Care, Sports Medicine, Wound Care • Techniques and Procedures • Technical Tips • Clinical Laboratory in Emergency Medicine • Pharmacology in Emergency Medicine • Case Presentations of the Harvard Emergency Medicine Residency • Visual Diagnosis in Emergency Medicine • Medical Classics • Emergency Forum • Editorial(s) • Letters to the Editor • Education • Administration of Emergency Medicine • International Emergency Medicine • Computers in Emergency Medicine • Violence: Recognition, Management, and Prevention • Ethics • Humanities and Medicine • American Academy of Emergency Medicine • AAEM Medical Student Forum • Book and Other Media Reviews • Calendar of Events • Abstracts • Trauma Reports • Ultrasound in Emergency Medicine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信