ReviewCureus2020
When Marriage Hurts: A Literature Review of Embedded Jewellery Ring Injuries.
Review in Cureus, 2020. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A ring is traditionally worn as a symbol of love and affection or as decorative ornamental jewellery. However, rings are not without risk. The spectrum of danger can range from debilitating avulsion injuries to simple contact dermatitis. Unknown to many, an unusual rarity exists; previous authors have termed this entity 'embedded ring syndrome'. We sought to review the literature and collate evidence on the common features of this syndrome. A literature review was performed on cases reported from 1947 to 2017 accessed through the healthcare database advanced search (HDAS). A total of 28 cases were analysed for demographics, symptomatology and operative techniques. Overall, 64.3% were females, and 50% had a psychiatric comorbidity. There was a causative event preceding the injury in 35.7% of cases; 71.4% had a reduced range of movement or reported a stiff finger and 32.1% had reduced sensation. The majority of patients underwent ring removal and primary closure, without documentation as to whether neurovascular bundles and tendons were visualised. Embedded ring injuries are rare. Consequently, information is sparsely available regarding its natural history and management. The hand surgeon's approach requires an understanding that the chronicity of these injuries can have a significant traumatic impact on the structures of the finger.
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.