ArticleJSES international2026
Alexander view as a stand-alone alternative to standard anteroposterior imaging for treatment decisions in acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation.
Article in JSES international, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To determine whether treatment decision-making in acromioclavicular joint injuries is possible using only Alexander views with diagnostic reliability comparable to conventional pre-operative imaging. Methods: Patients with acute first-time acromioclavicular joint injuries (Rockwood II-V) at 2 specialized centers (January 2019-June 2024) were retrospectively reviewed. Inclusion required complete pre-operative imaging consisting of either a panoramic view or bilateral Zanca views, plus at least one pre-operative modified Alexander stress view. A reference classification was established using coracoclavicular distance measurements, supplemented by the modified Alexander projection. Patients were stratified into a nonoperative group (Rockwood II-IIIA) and a potentially operative group (Rockwood IIIB-V). Modified circle measurements were performed for Alexander views. Three independent surgeons first assessed all cases using anteroposterior radiographs plus Alexander view and again after a 2-week washout period using only the Alexander view and recommended operative or nonoperative treatment. Inter-rater and intrarater reliability, diagnostic accuracy relative to the reference classification, and the correlation between circles values and injury severity were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic analyses were conducted to determine cutoff values for distinguishing higher-grade injuries. Results: 54 patients met inclusion criteria. Using complete imaging, raters demonstrated a sensitivity of 95.1% and specificity of 90.1% for treatment allocation with substantial inter-rater agreement (κ = 0.653). Using only Alexander views, diagnostic performance remained high (sensitivity 87.7%, specificity 90.1%) with substantial inter-rater (κ = 0.753) and substantial to almost perfect intrarater reliability (κ = 0.779-0.852). Modified circles values correlated strongly with injury severity (τ = 0.753, Conclusion: The Alexander view alone enabled accurate identification of high-grade instability as defined by Rockwood's classification and supported treatment decisions comparable to standard anteroposterior imaging. These findings suggest that routine panorama or Zanca views may not be required for decision-making in acute AC joint injuries.
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.