ArticleJournal of children's orthopaedics2023
A Delphi consensus study on the treatment of slipped capital femoral epiphysis: Considerable consensus in mild and moderate slips and limited consensus in severe slips.
Article in Journal of children's orthopaedics, 2023. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Slipped capital femoral epiphysis: pathomechanism, clinical presentation, diagnosis, natural history and treatment. A review of the literature.Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Article
- Fix it or risk it? Revisiting contralateral hip prophylactic fixation in unilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis: an updated review of the past decade's literature.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Review
- In Situ Fixation and Intertrochanteric Osteotomy for Severe Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis Following Femoral Neck Fracture: A Case Report with Application of Virtual Surgical Planning and 3D-Printed Patient-Specific Instruments.Journal of personalized 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this expert consensus study was to establish consensus on the treatment of different types of slipped capital femoral epiphysis and on the use of prophylactic screw fixation of the contralateral unaffected side. Methods: In this study, a four-round Delphi method was used. Questionnaires including all possible theoretical slip scenarios were sent online to 14 participants, experienced in the field of children's orthopedics and in the treatment of hip disorders in children. Results: In-situ fixation was considered to be the first treatment choice in all types of mild slip scenarios and in moderate, stable ones. Performing in-situ fixation was not favored in moderate, unstable, and in all severe slip scenarios. In moderate to severe, unstable slip scenarios, there was consensus on the use of gentle closed or open reduction and internal fixation. Any consensus was not established in the optimal treatment of severe, stable slips. There was also consensus on the use of prophylactic screw fixation of the contralateral side in case of co-existing endocrine disorder and younger age. Conclusions: The establishment of consensus on the treatment of all types of slipped capital femoral epiphysis even among the experienced surgeons does not seem to be possible. The severity of the slip and stability of the slip are the primary and secondary determinants of the surgeons' treatment choices, respectively. In-situ fixation is still the preferred treatment option in several slip types. Gentle capital realignment by closed or open means is recommended in displaced, unstable slips. Prophylactic screw fixation of the contralateral side is indicated under certain circumstances. Level of evidence: level V.
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.