ReviewShoulder & elbow2023
Content reporting and effectiveness of therapeutic exercise in the management of massive rotator cuff tears: A systematic review with 490 patients.
Review in Shoulder & elbow, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Massive rotator cuff tears (MRCT) account for a substantial fraction of tears above the age of 60 years. However, there are no clear criteria for prescription parameters within therapeutic exercise treatments. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects and characteristics of therapeutic exercise treatments in patients with MRCT. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, SciELO, Scopus and EMBASE from inception to August 2022. Studies were included if they evaluated the effects of exercise on patients with MRCT. The risk of bias was evaluated and the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) was also used. A narrative synthesis without meta-analysis was performed. Results: One randomized controlled trial, two non-randomized studies, six non-controlled studies, one case series and four retrospective studies were included. They ranged from serious to moderate risk of bias. The CERT reflected a poor description of the exercise programmes. Studies showed a pattern of improvements in most patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) surpassing the MCID, and active elevation range of motion. Conclusions: There is limited evidence that exercise and co-interventions are effective in the management of some patients with MRCT, based on a systematic review without meta-analysis. Future research should improve content reporting. Level of evidence: IV.
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.