ArticleEFORT open reviews2024
Surgical decisions on implant-related parameters can enhance knowledge transfer for glenoid bone grafting in primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a scoping review of heterogeneity sources.
Article in EFORT open reviews, 2024. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of the present scoping review is to identify sources of heterogeneity in reporting domains that have the potential to improve surgical decision-making in reverse shoulder arthroplasty associated with glenoid bone grafting. Methods: A scoping review was conducted according to the JBI and PRISMA ScR guidelines. Articles covering glenoid bone grafting at the time of reverse shoulder replacement, published between 2012 and 2022 in MEDLINE, Scopus, Epistemonikos, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, were searched. Reporting of core outcome measures, as well as prosthesis-related variables, rehabilitation protocols, radiographic evaluation methods, and bone graft incorporation assessments, were collected. Results: For the final analysis, a total of 14 articles were considered. There were 649 operated shoulders with a mean patient age of 72 years, ranging from 48 to 85 years. Analysis of preoperative ranges of motion and patient-reported outcome measures revealed increased heterogeneity in patient selection between studies. Reporting of implant-related parameters was the most inconsistent. Rehabilitation protocols were scarcely reported. Assessment of graft incorporation and radiographic evaluation of choice revealed that there is no consistent method or measurement and the clinical relevance of radiolucent lines at the graft-glenoid bone interface is unclear. Conclusion: Addressing implant-related reporting gaps has the highest potential to improve surgical decision-making and provide orthopedic surgeons with a more comprehensive understanding of published results on glenoid bone grafting at the time of primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty.
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.