ReviewCureus2026
Posterior Shoulder Instability in Contact Athletes: Recognition, Evaluation, and Management.
Review in Cureus, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Posterior shoulder instability is an important cause of shoulder pain and dysfunction in contact and collision athletes, but it is often underrecognized because many patients present with vague posterior shoulder pain and activity-related symptoms rather than a clear dislocation event. Repetitive loading in flexion, adduction, and internal rotation, common during blocking, tackling, and other push-based activities, can stress the posterior capsulolabral complex and produce a spectrum of pathology ranging from pain-predominant microinstability to recurrent symptomatic instability. Accurate diagnosis depends on careful pattern recognition through history, physical examination, and imaging interpreted in the proper clinical context. Nonoperative management with structured rehabilitation remains an appropriate initial strategy for selected athletes, although this approach may be less predictable in high-demand collision sports. Operative treatment is often considered in athletes with persistent symptoms, recurrent instability, or structural pathology that reduces the likelihood of success with rehabilitation alone. Osseous morphology, including posterior glenoid bone loss, dysplasia, and version abnormalities, may also influence treatment selection in selected cases. Return-to-play decisions should be criterion-based rather than time-based and should emphasize restoration of pain-free function, near-symmetric strength, dynamic stability, psychological readiness, and tolerance of sport-specific loading. Current evidence supports an individualized approach to management, but further athlete-specific prospective studies are needed to refine morphologic risk stratification, treatment selection, and return-to-play decision-making.
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.