FARES和Spaso方法治疗肩前脱位:一项前瞻性随机对照研究,证明联合入路的益处。

IF 3.9 2区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Kun-Han Lee, Shu-Hao Chang, Li-Wei Hung
{"title":"FARES和Spaso方法治疗肩前脱位:一项前瞻性随机对照研究,证明联合入路的益处。","authors":"Kun-Han Lee, Shu-Hao Chang, Li-Wei Hung","doi":"10.1038/s41598-025-04311-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Anterior shoulder dislocation is a common orthopedic emergency. While many reduction methods require sedation, the FARES (FAst, REliable, and Safe) and Spaso methods allow reduction without anesthesia. We conducted a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing the FARES and Spaso methods for anterior shoulder dislocation reduction. Patients aged 20 to 90 years were enrolled. The assigned closed reduction procedures were performed without patient sedation by trained orthopedic residents. If two attempts with the assigned method failed, the alternative method was used. The primary outcome was the first-attempt success rate, while secondary outcomes included overall success rate with both methods, reduction time, and pain scores. During November 2013 and December 2015, a total of 32 patients were randomized to the FARES (n = 17) or Spaso (n = 15) method. The first-attempt success rates were 71.6% for the FARES group and 80.0% for the Spaso group (p = 0.691). Among patients with failed closed reduction using the first technique, all patients in the Spaso-following-FARES group achieved successful reduction, whereas none in the FARES-following-Spaso group achieved successful reduction (p = 0.092). Pain scores during reduction were comparable between the FARES (4.29 ± 1.69) and Spaso (3.80 ± 2.65) techniques, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.542). Follow-up data were available for 28/32 patients (87.5%; mean 5.3 ± 2.2 years). Four patients were lost (3 FARES, 1 Spaso; p = 0.726). Recurrent dislocation occurred in 3 patients (10.7%; 1 FARES, 2 Spaso; p = 0.947), and 2 patients (1 per group; p = 0.876) underwent surgery (arthroscopic stabilization and rotator cuff repair). Both the FARES and Spaso methods were effective for reducing anterior shoulder dislocations. Combining these methods may improve overall reduction rates. Clinical trial registration: This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Registration number: NCT01979237) on 08/11/2013.</p>","PeriodicalId":21811,"journal":{"name":"Scientific Reports","volume":"15 1","pages":"18974"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12125210/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"FARES and Spaso method for anterior shoulder dislocation: a prospective randomized control study demonstrating the benefit of a combined approach.\",\"authors\":\"Kun-Han Lee, Shu-Hao Chang, Li-Wei Hung\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41598-025-04311-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Anterior shoulder dislocation is a common orthopedic emergency. While many reduction methods require sedation, the FARES (FAst, REliable, and Safe) and Spaso methods allow reduction without anesthesia. We conducted a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing the FARES and Spaso methods for anterior shoulder dislocation reduction. Patients aged 20 to 90 years were enrolled. The assigned closed reduction procedures were performed without patient sedation by trained orthopedic residents. If two attempts with the assigned method failed, the alternative method was used. The primary outcome was the first-attempt success rate, while secondary outcomes included overall success rate with both methods, reduction time, and pain scores. During November 2013 and December 2015, a total of 32 patients were randomized to the FARES (n = 17) or Spaso (n = 15) method. The first-attempt success rates were 71.6% for the FARES group and 80.0% for the Spaso group (p = 0.691). Among patients with failed closed reduction using the first technique, all patients in the Spaso-following-FARES group achieved successful reduction, whereas none in the FARES-following-Spaso group achieved successful reduction (p = 0.092). Pain scores during reduction were comparable between the FARES (4.29 ± 1.69) and Spaso (3.80 ± 2.65) techniques, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.542). Follow-up data were available for 28/32 patients (87.5%; mean 5.3 ± 2.2 years). Four patients were lost (3 FARES, 1 Spaso; p = 0.726). Recurrent dislocation occurred in 3 patients (10.7%; 1 FARES, 2 Spaso; p = 0.947), and 2 patients (1 per group; p = 0.876) underwent surgery (arthroscopic stabilization and rotator cuff repair). Both the FARES and Spaso methods were effective for reducing anterior shoulder dislocations. Combining these methods may improve overall reduction rates. Clinical trial registration: This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Registration number: NCT01979237) on 08/11/2013.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scientific Reports\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"18974\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12125210/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scientific Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-04311-x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scientific Reports","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-04311-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

肩前脱位是一种常见的骨科急症。虽然许多复位方法需要镇静,但FARES(快速、可靠和安全)和Spaso方法允许在没有麻醉的情况下复位。我们进行了一项单中心、前瞻性、随机对照试验,比较了FARES和Spaso方法治疗肩关节前脱位的疗效。患者年龄在20 - 90岁之间。指定的闭合复位手术由训练有素的骨科住院医师在没有镇静的情况下进行。如果使用指定的方法进行两次尝试都失败,则使用替代方法。主要结果是第一次尝试的成功率,而次要结果包括两种方法的总成功率、复位时间和疼痛评分。2013年11月至2015年12月,共32例患者被随机分为FARES (n = 17)和Spaso (n = 15)两组。FARES组首次尝试成功率为71.6%,Spaso组为80.0% (p = 0.691)。在使用第一种技术闭合复位失败的患者中,spaso - fares组所有患者复位成功,而fares - spaso组没有患者复位成功(p = 0.092)。复位时的疼痛评分,FARES(4.29±1.69)与Spaso(3.80±2.65)比较,差异无统计学意义(p = 0.542)。32例患者中有28例(87.5%;平均5.3±2.2年)。4例患者丢失(3例FARES, 1例Spaso;p = 0.726)。复发脱位3例(10.7%);1 FARES, 2 Spaso;P = 0.947), 2例(每组1例;P = 0.876)接受手术(关节镜下稳定和肩袖修复)。FARES和Spaso方法均可有效减少肩关节前脱位。结合这些方法可以提高总体还原率。临床试验注册:本试验于2013年11月8日在ClinicalTrials.gov注册(注册号:NCT01979237)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

FARES and Spaso method for anterior shoulder dislocation: a prospective randomized control study demonstrating the benefit of a combined approach.

FARES and Spaso method for anterior shoulder dislocation: a prospective randomized control study demonstrating the benefit of a combined approach.

FARES and Spaso method for anterior shoulder dislocation: a prospective randomized control study demonstrating the benefit of a combined approach.

Anterior shoulder dislocation is a common orthopedic emergency. While many reduction methods require sedation, the FARES (FAst, REliable, and Safe) and Spaso methods allow reduction without anesthesia. We conducted a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing the FARES and Spaso methods for anterior shoulder dislocation reduction. Patients aged 20 to 90 years were enrolled. The assigned closed reduction procedures were performed without patient sedation by trained orthopedic residents. If two attempts with the assigned method failed, the alternative method was used. The primary outcome was the first-attempt success rate, while secondary outcomes included overall success rate with both methods, reduction time, and pain scores. During November 2013 and December 2015, a total of 32 patients were randomized to the FARES (n = 17) or Spaso (n = 15) method. The first-attempt success rates were 71.6% for the FARES group and 80.0% for the Spaso group (p = 0.691). Among patients with failed closed reduction using the first technique, all patients in the Spaso-following-FARES group achieved successful reduction, whereas none in the FARES-following-Spaso group achieved successful reduction (p = 0.092). Pain scores during reduction were comparable between the FARES (4.29 ± 1.69) and Spaso (3.80 ± 2.65) techniques, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.542). Follow-up data were available for 28/32 patients (87.5%; mean 5.3 ± 2.2 years). Four patients were lost (3 FARES, 1 Spaso; p = 0.726). Recurrent dislocation occurred in 3 patients (10.7%; 1 FARES, 2 Spaso; p = 0.947), and 2 patients (1 per group; p = 0.876) underwent surgery (arthroscopic stabilization and rotator cuff repair). Both the FARES and Spaso methods were effective for reducing anterior shoulder dislocations. Combining these methods may improve overall reduction rates. Clinical trial registration: This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Registration number: NCT01979237) on 08/11/2013.

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
Scientific Reports
Scientific Reports Natural Science Disciplines-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
19567
审稿时长
3.9 months
期刊介绍: We publish original research from all areas of the natural sciences, psychology, medicine and engineering. You can learn more about what we publish by browsing our specific scientific subject areas below or explore Scientific Reports by browsing all articles and collections. Scientific Reports has a 2-year impact factor: 4.380 (2021), and is the 6th most-cited journal in the world, with more than 540,000 citations in 2020 (Clarivate Analytics, 2021). •Engineering Engineering covers all aspects of engineering, technology, and applied science. It plays a crucial role in the development of technologies to address some of the world''s biggest challenges, helping to save lives and improve the way we live. •Physical sciences Physical sciences are those academic disciplines that aim to uncover the underlying laws of nature — often written in the language of mathematics. It is a collective term for areas of study including astronomy, chemistry, materials science and physics. •Earth and environmental sciences Earth and environmental sciences cover all aspects of Earth and planetary science and broadly encompass solid Earth processes, surface and atmospheric dynamics, Earth system history, climate and climate change, marine and freshwater systems, and ecology. It also considers the interactions between humans and these systems. •Biological sciences Biological sciences encompass all the divisions of natural sciences examining various aspects of vital processes. The concept includes anatomy, physiology, cell biology, biochemistry and biophysics, and covers all organisms from microorganisms, animals to plants. •Health sciences The health sciences study health, disease and healthcare. This field of study aims to develop knowledge, interventions and technology for use in healthcare to improve the treatment of patients.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信