Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29628705›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2018

Ultrasound guided versus landmark guided corticosteroid injection in patients with rotator cuff syndrome: Randomised controlled trial.

Himanshu Bhayana, Puneet Mishra, Anupama Tandon, Amite Pankaj, Rohit Pandey, Raskesh Malhotra

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Ultrasound-guided bursal injections.Skeletal radiology · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Himanshu BhayanaDepartment of Orthopaedics, GTB Hospital & UCMS, Delhi 110095, India.
Puneet MishraDepartment of Orthopaedics, GTB Hospital & UCMS, Delhi 110095, India.
Anupama TandonDepartment of Radiodiagnosis, GTB Hospital & UCMS, Delhi, India.
Amite PankajFortis Shalimar Bagh, Delhi, India.
Rohit PandeyDepartment of Orthopaedics, GTB Hospital & UCMS, Delhi 110095, India.
Raskesh MalhotraDepartment of Orthopaedics, GTB Hospital & UCMS, Delhi 110095, India.
Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital · INFortis Healthcare · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveImpingement syndrome is the most common differential in a patient presenting to an orthopaedic OPD with shoulder pain. Impingement syndrome is often managed with subacromial corticosteroid injection, which can be instilled using either landmark guided (LMG) approach or with the assistance of ultrasound (US). This study was envisaged to enquire whether ultrasound assistance improves the accuracy, efficacy or safety profile of the injection.

methods60 patients of rotator cuff syndrome underwent diagnostic ultrasound. They were randomly assigned to receive subacromial injection of 2 ml (40 mg/ml) methylprenisolone and 2 ml of 1% lignocaine combination either by US assistance (n = 30) or using LMG assistance (n = 30). The patients were evaluated before injection and on follow up visits at day 5, week 3, week 6 and 3rd month by a single assessor. The assessor was blinded of the treatment group to which patient belonged. Clinical assessment included demographic and clinical data, accuracy of injection, VAS (0-100) for pain, Constant score with goniometer evaluation of range of motion, patient's self assessment proforma and post injection side effects if any.

resultsInitial demographic, clinical and US findings in the groups exhibited no significant differences. The accuracy of US guided injections (100%) was more when compared from LMG injection (93.3%). Both VAS and Constant score showed significant improvement following steroid injection up to 3 months of follow up. However the differences in the two groups were not significant suggesting comparable efficacy of the two approaches. (Mean VAS score decrease: 27.23 for US and 25.16 for LMG, p < 0.05: Mean constant score change: 14.73 for US and 15.00 for LMG, p < 0.05). The safety profile in both groups was comparable.

conclusionAlthough US guided injections have a higher accuracy of drug placement in the subacromial bursa, there is no difference in terms of clinical outcomes or safety profile of either of the method. Hence US guided injections seems to be unjustified, when compared to equally efficacious and cost effective LMG steroid injection.

Indexed as

Landmark guidedSteroid injectionSubacromial injectionUltrasound guided

Identifiers

PMID29628705
PMCPMC5883910
OpenAlexW1969987585

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.