Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33847573›Full record

SynthesisActa orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica2021

Comparison of treatment results between surgical and conservative treatment of distal radius fractures in adults: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Yifan Chen, Chaohui Lin, Xuan Huang, Fengfei Lin, Xiongbiao Luo

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Efficacy of cast immobilization versus surgical treatment for distal radius fractures in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yifan ChenDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fuzhou, Fujian, China.
Chaohui LinDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fuzhou, Fujian, China;Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Fuzhou Second Hospital Affiliated to Xiamen University, the Teaching Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China.
Xuan HuangSchool of Medicine, Xiamen University, Xiamen, Fujian, China.
Fengfei LinDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fuzhou, Fujian, China;Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Fuzhou Second Hospital Affiliated to Xiamen University, the Teaching Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China.
Xiongbiao LuoXiamen University, Xiamen, Fujian, China.
Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNXiamen University · CNFujian Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis meta-analysis study aims to determine the efficacy and safety of surgical and conservative treatments for distal radius fractures (DRFs) in adults.

methodsReports of randomized controlled trials were retrieved from the Web of Science, Pubmed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Medline, Ovid, and BIOSIS for studies that met the eligibility criteria. The search was limited to human subjects and had no language limits. The search strategy was check by two independent reviewers. If there was any dispute, a third reviewer was consulted. Primary outcomes were: (1) the active wrist range of motion including flexion, extension, pronation, supination, radial, and ulnar deviation; (2) the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score; and (3) radiological outcomes including radial inclination and ulnar variance. Secondary outcomes were the number of complications including non-infectious and infectious. Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool provided by the Cochrane Review Manager 5.3.

resultsA total of 10 randomized controlled trials were included. The meta-analysis detected no statistically significant difference in pooled data for complications not included infection (MD 0.64, CI: 0.33 to 1.23, Z=1.34, p=0.18). Surgical treatment achieved a better range of motion (MD 3.76, CI: 1.58 to 5.95, Z=3.37, p=0.0007), DASH score (MD -6.57, CI: -9.08 to -4.06, Z=5.12, p<0.00001), and radiographic outcomes (MD 3.75, CI: 2.75 to 4.74, Z=7.37, p<0.00001) compared with conservative treatment. In contrast, the conservative treatment achieved less infection rate compared with surgical treatment (MD 4.09, CI: 1.18 to 14.21, Z=2.21, p=0.03).

conclusionFindings of this study reveal that when compared with conservative treatment, surgical treatment can ensure better clinical and radiological results for the treatment of DRFs in adults. Although similar complication rates can be encountered with both treatment modalities, it should be taken into account that the rate of infection may be higher in surgical treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, Therapeutic Study.

Indexed as

Conservative TreatmentFracture Fixation, InternalRadius FracturesAdultHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID33847573
PMCPMC11229622
OpenAlexW3127314121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.