ArticleHand (New York, N.Y.)2022
Barriers to Upper Extremity Reconstruction for Patients With Cerebral Palsy.
Article in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical Reconstruction of the Upper Extremity in Patients With Cerebral Palsy: Indication, Techniques, and Rehabilitation Considerations.Annals of rehabilitation medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReconstructive surgery for upper extremity manifestations of cerebral palsy (CP) has been demonstrated to be safe and effective, yet many potential candidates are never evaluated for surgery. The purpose of this study was to determine barriers to upper extremity reconstruction for patients with CP in a cohort of upper extremity surgeons and nonsurgeons.
methodsWe sent a questionnaire to 4167 surgeons and nonsurgeon physicians, aggregated responses, and analyzed for differences in perceptions regarding surgical efficacy, patient candidacy for surgery, compliance with rehabilitation, remuneration, complexity of care, and physician comfort providing care.
resultsSurgeons and nonsurgeons did not agree on the literature support of surgical efficacy (73% vs 35% agree or strongly agree, respectively). Both surgeons and nonsurgeons felt that many potential candidates exist, yet there was variability in their confidence in identifying them. Most surgeons (59%) and nonsurgeons (61%) felt comfortable performing surgery and directing the associated rehabilitation, respectively. Neither group reported that patient compliance, access to rehabilitation services, and available financial resources were a major barrier, but surgeons were more likely than nonsurgeons to feel that remuneration for services was inadequate (37% vs 13%). Both groups agreed that surgical treatments are complex and should be performed in the setting of a multidisciplinary team.
conclusionsSurgeons and nonsurgeons differ in their views regarding upper extremity reconstructive surgery for CP. Barriers to reconstruction may be addressed by performing higher level research, implementing multispecialty educational outreach, developing objective referral criteria, increasing surgical remuneration, improving access to trained upper extremity surgeons, and implementing multidisciplinary CP clinics.
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.