ArticleCureus2025
Comparison of Intra-articular Haematoma Block and Procedural Sedation for the Manipulation of Closed Ankle Fracture Dislocations: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Ankle fracture dislocations are commonly reduced in the emergency setting under procedural sedation (PS), which requires trained clinicians and monitoring. This study aimed to evaluate the patient-reported efficacy of intra-articular haematoma block (IAHB) as an analgesic alternative to PS for the closed reduction of ankle fracture dislocations. Methods Data from patients with displaced ankle fractures requiring manipulation between October 2020 and April 2021 were analysed. Patients who received IAHB were compared to those who received PS. IAHB involved the injection of 10 mL of 1% lignocaine into the joint space. Results Twenty-eight patients received PS, and 25 received IAHB. There were no statistically significant differences in visual analogue scale (VAS) scores before, during, or after treatment (p > 0.05). First-attempt reductions were successful in 76% of IAHB patients compared to 82.1% of PS patients. IAHB was associated with lower medication costs and a shorter time to manipulation. Conclusion IAHB is a cost-effective and safe alternative to PS for managing ankle fracture dislocations.
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.