ReviewArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2020
Postoperative Management Following Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review.
Review in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2020. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Return to Sport Testing After Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery in Adolescent and Young Adult Patients.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2025Article
- Return to sports following arthroscopic Bankart repair: a narrative review.Ewha medical journal · 2024Review
- Rehabilitation Protocol Variability Following Arthroscopic Bankart Repair and Remplissage for Management of Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2024Article
- Factors That Influence the Return to Sport After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Glenohumeral Instability.Open access journal of sports medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to review systematically the literature concerning postoperative management following arthroscopic Bankart repair for traumatic anterior shoulder instability in adolescent and young adult (≤ 25 years) athletes.
methodsThe Pubmed, Medline, EMBASE, EBSCO (CINAHL), and Google Scholar databases were systematically searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify all studies reporting postoperative rehabilitation guidelines following arthroscopic Bankart repair in the adolescent and young adult population. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies instrument and Modified Coleman Methodology Score were used for quality assessment of the included studies. All aspects of rehabilitation were extracted and analyzed, including type/duration of immobilization, range of motion, strength, and return to sport (RTS) criteria.
resultsScreening yielded 17 eligible studies with a total of 675 patients and an average age of 18.3 years. There was considerable variation with regard to reported postoperative rehabilitation guidelines. Of the 17 studies, 15 reported the duration of immobilization; there was a mean of 4 weeks (range, 2-6 weeks). Range of motion and strength restrictions were reported in 15 (88.2%) and 13 (76.4%) studies, respectively. All of the 17 studies included an expected timeframe for RTS, but only 5 of the studies (29.4%) included either subjective or objective criteria to determine safe RTS. Differences in outcomes were unable to be assessed due to large study heterogeneity.
conclusionConsiderable variation is reported in postoperative rehabilitation guidelines following arthroscopic Bankart repair for traumatic shoulder instability in the adolescent and young adult population. All studies used time-based criteria for determining RTS, but subjective and/or objective criteria were lacking in the majority of studies. The current literature lacks data to generate evidence-based rehabilitation protocols in this young athletic population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.
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.