ArticleDer Unfallchirurg2014
[Abduction/external rotation immobilization after primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: which ortheses are suitable?].
Article in Der Unfallchirurg, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Immobilization in External Rotation and Abduction Versus Arthroscopic Stabilization After First-Time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.The American journal of sports medicine · 2021Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImmobilization of the shoulder in 60 ° external rotation and 30 ° abduction after primary anterior shoulder dislocation has been shown to allow anatomical reduction and potential healing of the capsule-labrum complex. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate commercially available shoulder braces concerning functionality and comfort as well as for potential problems.
methodsIn this study ten healthy subjects (6 female, 4 male and average age 23 years) tested four braces: 1. Omo Immobil (Ottobock), 2. Quadrat (DJO Global), 3. MP Airplane Axilla (Horst Rattenhuber GmbH) and 4. ARC XR (Bledsoe Brace Systems) with respect to functionality and comfort. Each subject completed simulated activities of daily living (ADLs) and a the end of each ADL the subject evaluated comfort, difficulty of the activities and potential pain on a points scale. The position or the change of the position were controlled by digital photographs. Additionally it was checked whether the subjects could actively change the position of the brace contrary to the desired position.
resultsBraces 3 and 4 were rated significantly more comfortable (p < 0.05). Even the difficulty of the activities was rated lower and in particular putting on and taking off the braces was assessed to be significantly easier in comparison to braces 1 and 2. In addition, differences of potential pain were statistically significant and pain was experienced only with braces 1 and 2. The measuring of the position showed no significant differences (p > 0.05). For braces 1 and 2 the active change of the position by subjects was significantly higher and the arm could be rotated more against the favored position (p < 0.05). Between braces 3 and 4, there were no statistical differences during the whole evaluation.
conclusionsOrtheses where the main joint is positioned in and not in front of the axilla or which can ensure a jointless stabilization of the shoulder or which allow an improved position by an additional sling on the opposite shoulder, are most qualified for immobilization of the shoulder in an external rotation/abduction position with respect to functionality and comfort.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.