肱骨近端骨折非手术治疗的固定期:系统回顾与元分析》。

IF 1.2 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Mehdi Ataei, Ali Moradi, Mohammad H Ebrahimzadeh, Sedigheh Rastaghi, Mahla Daliri
{"title":"肱骨近端骨折非手术治疗的固定期:系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Mehdi Ataei, Ali Moradi, Mohammad H Ebrahimzadeh, Sedigheh Rastaghi, Mahla Daliri","doi":"10.22038/ABJS.2023.76126.3519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) are common fractures in the elderly and are typically treated conservatively with immobilization. However, there is no consensus on whether to choose early or late conventional mobilization, taking their outcomes into account. This paper reviews comparative studies on the clinical outcomes of one- and three-week immobilization periods in terms of limb function, pain intensity, and complications following the adoption of the non-surgical treatment of PHF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The current systematic review started with searching PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on PHF patients to compare the clinical outcomes between patients receiving the one-week mobilization (early mobilization) and those receiving the three-week mobilization (late mobilization). We also performed a meta-analysis to compare the two groups' limb function and pain levels at three and six months of follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five of the seven RCTs had adequate data to be included in the meta-analysis. The quantitative results showed that the early mobilized patients had improved limb function at three [weighted mean difference (WMD): 5.15 (CI 95%: 0.68-9.62)] and six [WMD: 3.51 (CI 95%: 0.43-6.60)] months, but not at 12 months of follow-up. At either three, six, or 12 months, there was no difference in pain intensity between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review supports the adoption of early mobilization at one week for the non-operative management of PHFs. However, to compare the long-term effects, more clinical trials with longer follow-ups are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":46704,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery-ABJS","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11070675/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Immobilization Period for the Non-Operative Treatment of Proximal Humerus Fractures: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Mehdi Ataei, Ali Moradi, Mohammad H Ebrahimzadeh, Sedigheh Rastaghi, Mahla Daliri\",\"doi\":\"10.22038/ABJS.2023.76126.3519\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) are common fractures in the elderly and are typically treated conservatively with immobilization. However, there is no consensus on whether to choose early or late conventional mobilization, taking their outcomes into account. This paper reviews comparative studies on the clinical outcomes of one- and three-week immobilization periods in terms of limb function, pain intensity, and complications following the adoption of the non-surgical treatment of PHF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The current systematic review started with searching PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on PHF patients to compare the clinical outcomes between patients receiving the one-week mobilization (early mobilization) and those receiving the three-week mobilization (late mobilization). We also performed a meta-analysis to compare the two groups' limb function and pain levels at three and six months of follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five of the seven RCTs had adequate data to be included in the meta-analysis. The quantitative results showed that the early mobilized patients had improved limb function at three [weighted mean difference (WMD): 5.15 (CI 95%: 0.68-9.62)] and six [WMD: 3.51 (CI 95%: 0.43-6.60)] months, but not at 12 months of follow-up. At either three, six, or 12 months, there was no difference in pain intensity between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review supports the adoption of early mobilization at one week for the non-operative management of PHFs. However, to compare the long-term effects, more clinical trials with longer follow-ups are needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46704,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery-ABJS\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11070675/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery-ABJS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22038/ABJS.2023.76126.3519\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery-ABJS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22038/ABJS.2023.76126.3519","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:肱骨近端骨折(PHF)是老年人常见的骨折,通常采用固定的保守治疗方法。然而,关于选择早期还是晚期常规活动,目前还没有达成共识。本文综述了采用非手术治疗 PHF 后,一周和三周固定期在肢体功能、疼痛强度和并发症方面的临床疗效比较研究:本系统性综述首先搜索了 PubMed、Scopus 和 Web of Science 数据库中有关 PHF 患者的随机临床试验 (RCT),以比较一周固定期(早期固定期)和三周固定期(晚期固定期)患者的临床疗效。我们还进行了一项荟萃分析,比较了两组患者在三个月和六个月随访期间的肢体功能和疼痛水平:结果:七项研究中的五项都有足够的数据被纳入荟萃分析。定量结果显示,早期动员的患者在随访3个月[加权平均差(WMD):5.15(CI 95%:0.68-9.62)]和6个月[WMD:3.51(CI 95%:0.43-6.60)]时肢体功能有所改善,但在随访12个月时没有改善。在3个月、6个月或12个月的随访中,两组患者的疼痛强度没有差异:本综述支持在 PHFs 非手术治疗中采用一周早期活动疗法。然而,要比较长期效果,还需要更多的临床试验和更长时间的随访。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Immobilization Period for the Non-Operative Treatment of Proximal Humerus Fractures: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objectives: Proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) are common fractures in the elderly and are typically treated conservatively with immobilization. However, there is no consensus on whether to choose early or late conventional mobilization, taking their outcomes into account. This paper reviews comparative studies on the clinical outcomes of one- and three-week immobilization periods in terms of limb function, pain intensity, and complications following the adoption of the non-surgical treatment of PHF.

Methods: The current systematic review started with searching PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on PHF patients to compare the clinical outcomes between patients receiving the one-week mobilization (early mobilization) and those receiving the three-week mobilization (late mobilization). We also performed a meta-analysis to compare the two groups' limb function and pain levels at three and six months of follow-up.

Results: Five of the seven RCTs had adequate data to be included in the meta-analysis. The quantitative results showed that the early mobilized patients had improved limb function at three [weighted mean difference (WMD): 5.15 (CI 95%: 0.68-9.62)] and six [WMD: 3.51 (CI 95%: 0.43-6.60)] months, but not at 12 months of follow-up. At either three, six, or 12 months, there was no difference in pain intensity between the two groups.

Conclusion: This review supports the adoption of early mobilization at one week for the non-operative management of PHFs. However, to compare the long-term effects, more clinical trials with longer follow-ups are needed.

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
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
128
期刊介绍: The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery (ABJS) aims to encourage a better understanding of all aspects of Orthopedic Sciences. The journal accepts scientific papers including original research, review article, short communication, case report, and letter to the editor in all fields of bone, joint, musculoskeletal surgery and related researches. The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery (ABJS) will publish papers in all aspects of today`s modern orthopedic sciences including: Arthroscopy, Arthroplasty, Sport Medicine, Reconstruction, Hand and Upper Extremity, Pediatric Orthopedics, Spine, Trauma, Foot and Ankle, Tumor, Joint Rheumatic Disease, Skeletal Imaging, Orthopedic Physical Therapy, Rehabilitation, Orthopedic Basic Sciences (Biomechanics, Biotechnology, Biomaterial..).
×
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