ArticleCureus2025
Orthogonal Radiographs After Shoulder Reduction: Are We Meeting the Standard?
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Anterior shoulder dislocation is a common emergency presentation. Post-reduction radiographs are essential to confirm concentric reduction and exclude associated injuries. Guidelines from the British Elbow and Shoulder Society (BESS) and local hospital policy recommend orthogonal views, including anteroposterior and either axillary or scapular Y projections. Failure to obtain adequate imaging risks missed malreduction, overlooked fractures, and unnecessary repeat imaging. Methods We conducted a retrospective service evaluation of 22 consecutive patients with anterior shoulder dislocation managed in the emergency department of a single tertiary centre. Radiographic adequacy was defined as the presence of orthogonal post-reduction views in accordance with BESS and local guidance. Data collected included demographics, initial and post-reduction imaging, adequacy of views, whether inadequacies were recognised or acted upon by resident doctors, repeat imaging, and additional investigations. Results Only five of 22 patients (22.7%, 95% CI 10.1-43.4) received adequate orthogonal post-reduction radiographs. Inadequate imaging occurred in 17 of 22 patients (77.3%), of which only two cases were recognised by resident doctors (11.8% of documented inadequate cases). No repeat imaging was requested in the emergency department to address inadequate films. Two patients underwent further radiographs later during inpatient admission for social reasons, unrelated to adequacy. Although discharge flow was not interrupted, this reflected a failure to recognise inadequacy at the time of ED care. Additional imaging with MRI, MRI arthrogram, or CT was obtained in several cases as part of subsequent outpatient management. Conclusion Compliance with post-reduction imaging standards for shoulder dislocation was poor, and inadequate films were rarely recognised by resident doctors. This represents both a guideline compliance gap and a training issue in radiograph interpretation. Ensuring orthogonal post-reduction views is a basic, low-cost intervention that can improve patient safety and diagnostic certainty. Targeted education and reinforcement of departmental policy, followed by re-audit, are recommended.
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.