Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38058570›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2023

Assessment, patient selection, and rehabilitation of nerve transfers.

Emma A Bateman, Juliana Larocerie-Salgado, Douglas C Ross, Thomas A Miller, Stahs Pripotnev

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Emma A Bateman *Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Juliana Larocerie-Salgado *Roth McFarlane Hand & Upper Limb Centre, St Joseph's Health Care London, London, ON, Canada.
Douglas C Ross *Roth McFarlane Hand & Upper Limb Centre, St Joseph's Health Care London, London, ON, Canada.
Thomas A Miller *Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Stahs Pripotnev *Roth McFarlane Hand & Upper Limb Centre, St Joseph's Health Care London, London, ON, Canada.
Western University · CASt Joseph's Health Care · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Peripheral nerve injuries are common and can have a devastating effect on physical, psychological, and socioeconomic wellbeing. Peripheral nerve transfers have become the standard of care for many types of peripheral nerve injury due to their superior outcomes relative to conventional techniques. As the indications for, and use of, nerve transfers expand, the importance of pre-operative assessment and post-operative optimization increases. There are two principal advantages of nerve transfers: (1) their ability to shorten the time to reinnervation of muscles undergoing denervation because of peripheral nerve injury; and (2) their specificity in ensuring proximal motor and sensory axons are directed towards appropriate motor and sensory targets. Compared to conventional nerve grafting, nerve transfers offer opportunities to reinnervate muscles affected by cervical spinal cord injury and to augment natural reinnervation potential for very proximal injuries. This article provides a narrative review of the current scientific knowledge and clinical understanding of nerve transfers including peripheral nerve injury assessment and pre- and post-operative electrodiagnostic testing, adjuvant therapies, and post-operative rehabilitation for optimizing nerve transfer outcomes.

Indexed as

electromyographynerve transfernerve transfer rehabilitationperipheral nerve injuryrehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID38058570
PMCPMC10696649
OpenAlexW4388832982

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.