Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30921377›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2019

Treatment of radius or ulna fractures in the elderly: A systematic review covering effectiveness, safety, economic aspects and current practice.

Cecilia Mellstrand Navarro, Agneta Brolund, Carl Ekholm, Emelie Heintz, Emin Hoxha Ekström, Per Olof Josefsson, Lina Leander, Peter Nordström, Lena Zidén, Karin Stenström

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Percutaneous pinning for treating distal radial fractures in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Cecilia Mellstrand NavarroDepartment of Hand Surgery, Karolinska Institute, Institution for Clinical Research and Education, Södersjukhuset Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-3312-9375
Agneta BrolundSwedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services, Stockholm, Sweden.
Carl EkholmDepartment of Orthopaedics, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Mölndal, Sweden.
Emelie HeintzSwedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-0715-7591
Emin Hoxha EkströmSwedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services, Stockholm, Sweden.
Per Olof JosefssonDepartment of Orthopaedics, Skane University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.
Lina LeanderSwedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services, Stockholm, Sweden.
Peter NordströmDepartment of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Geriatrics, Umeå, Sweden.
Lena ZidénDepartment of Health and Rehabilitation, The Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Karin StenströmSwedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services, Stockholm, Sweden.
SBU - Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services · SEKarolinska Institutet · SESahlgrenska University Hospital · SESkåne University Hospital · SEUmeå University · SEUniversity of Gothenburg · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe objective of the present study was to evaluate effectiveness, complications and cost-effectiveness of any surgical or non-surgical treatment for radius or ulna fractures in elderly patients. Secondary objectives were to analyze present treatment traditions of distal radius fractures (DRF) in Sweden and to calculate resource usage for its treatment. METHODS AND

findingsThe assessment contains a systematic review of clinical and health economic studies comparing treatment options for radius or ulna fractures. The results regarding the effectiveness of the treatments are summarized in meta-analyses. In addition, the assessment contains a cost analysis for different treatment options commonly used for DRF care, and an analysis of registry data on the incidence and treatment of DRF. In total 31 randomized controlled trials were included in meta-analyses. When comparing functional outcome for plate fixation versus non-surgical treatment for DRF, there were no clinically important differences at one-year follow-up (mean difference [MD], -3.29, 95% CI, -7.03; 0.44). Similar results were found when comparing plating and percutaneous methods with respect to functional outcome (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.07, 95% CI, -0.21; 0.07) and grip strength (MD, -3.47, 95% CI, -11.21; 4.28). There were no differences for minor complications, (risk difference [RD], -0.01, 95% CI, -0.07; 0.05) whereas major complications were less common for the percutaneous group, (RD, 0.02, 95% CI, 0.02; 0.03). Given the low number of studies, the evidence above was rated as moderate certainty. The cost for plate fixation versus plaster cast was estimated to 1698 compared to 137 US dollars. For DRF, plate fixation increased in Sweden between 2005 and 2013, and was the most common surgical method in 2013.

conclusionsSurgical treatment of moderately displaced distal radius fractures in elderly patients offers no clear benefit compared to non-surgical treatment. Plating procedures have become more common during the second millennium and involve higher costs and higher risk of major complications than percutaneous options.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisAgedBone SubstitutesCasts, SurgicalDatabases, FactualFracture FixationHand StrengthHumansTreatment OutcomeUlna FracturesBone Substitutes

Identifiers

PMID30921377
PMCPMC6438530
OpenAlexW2933982531

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.