ArticleInternational orthopaedics2020
Comparison of clinical outcomes between arthroscopic debridement and conservative treatment of primary adhesive capsulitis of the hip.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Adhesive Capsulitis of Hip-A Systematic Review of Literature.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2023Review
- Biomechanical Asymmetry of Strength and Dynamic Balance Kinetics in Middle-Ages with Adhesive Capsulitis of the Hip.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Adhesive Capsulitis of the Hip: A Case Presentation and Review.Orthopedic reviews · 2022Article
- Letter to the editor regarding "Comparison of clinical outcomes between arthroscopic debridement and conservative treatment of primary adhesive capsulitis of the hip".International orthopaedics · 2021Article
- L-Shaped Arthroscopic Posterior Capsular Release in Frozen Shoulder.Video journal of sports medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to assess the clinical outcomes and change of ROM between patients with adhesive capsulitis of the hip (ACH) who underwent arthroscopic treatment and those who underwent conservative treatment at a minimum follow-up of two years.
methodsFrom 2010 to 2017, 35 hips (32 patients, 10 men and 22 women) diagnosed with primary ACH were enrolled and followed up for a minimum of two years. Arthroscopic surgery was performed in 17 patients (20 hips, operation group), and conservative treatment was performed in 15 patients (15 hips, control group). Outcomes were measured with the visual analogue scale (VAS), University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) activity scale, modified Harris hip score (mHHS), and degree of range of motion (ROM).
resultsThe patients in the operation group were younger than those in the control group (mean age, 36.6 vs 46.2, p = 0.032). The VAS scores were significantly lower in the operation group than in the control group at two weeks, six weeks, and 24 months of follow-up. Moreover, the operation group showed a trend of better values of UCLA and mHHS, with no statistical differences during the entire follow-up; these patients also achieved greater improvements of external rotation at six weeks' evaluation.
conclusionThe patients with ACH in the two groups shows improvement of pain, UCLA scale, mHHS, and ROM at a minimum two year follow-up. Based on this study, we do not routinely recommend surgical treatment. However, patients with intractable pain and severe limitation of ROM are possible candidate of arthroscopic capsular release.
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.