ArticleRadiologia brasileira
Magnetic resonance arthrography of the shoulder: a painful procedure?
Article in Radiologia brasileira. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Magnetic resonance arthrography: what is its importance in the present day?Radiologia brasileiraArticle
- Upper-limb magnetic resonance lymphangiography: a useful new technique.Radiologia brasileiraArticle
- Hip pain in childhood.Radiologia brasileiraArticle
- Imaging evaluation of hallux valgus.Radiologia brasileiraArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the pain expected to that effectively caused by magnetic resonance arthrography of the shoulder and, secondarily, to describe a simplified approach to the technique for articular access. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe prospectively evaluated 40 participants who used a visual analog scale and a simplified categorical scale to indicate the level of pain expected and that experienced after the procedure, comparing the two with the Wilcoxon matched-pairs test. We also determined gender-related differences in pain conditions using the Mann-Whitney U test. In addition, we described a modified technique involving radiographic localization and the use of standard puncture needles for articular access.
resultsAnalysis of the visual analog scales showed that the pain experienced was less than had been expected, with median scores of 1.75 and 3.75, respectively (
conclusionMagnetic resonance arthrography of the shoulder is less painful than patients expect. In addition, digital radiographic guidance combined with the use of standard puncture needles appears to improve the efficiency of the method.
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.