Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 1 | Pages 12 - 18
1 Jan 2022
Weil S Arnander M Pearse Y Tennent D

Aims

The amount of glenoid bone loss is an important factor in deciding between soft-tissue and bony reconstruction when managing anterior shoulder instability. Accurate and reproducible measurement of glenoid bone loss is therefore vital in evaluation of shoulder instability and recommending specific treatment. The aim of this systematic review is to identify the range methods and measurement techniques employed in clinical studies treating glenoid bone loss.

Methods

A systematic review of the PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases was undertaken to cover a ten-year period from February 2011 to February 2021. We identified clinical studies that incorporated bone loss assessment in the methodology as part of the decision-making in the management of patients with anterior shoulder instability. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) were used.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 1 | Pages 15 - 21
1 Jan 2019
Kelly MJ Holton AE Cassar-Gheiti AJ Hanna SA Quinlan JF Molony DC

Aims

The glenohumeral joint is the most frequently dislocated articulation, but possibly due to the lower prevalence of posterior shoulder dislocations, approximately 50% to 79% of posterior glenohumeral dislocations are missed at initial presentation. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the most recent evidence involving the aetiology of posterior glenohumeral dislocations, as well as the diagnosis and treatment.

Materials and Methods

A systematic search was conducted using PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane (January 1997 to September 2017), with references from articles also evaluated. Studies reporting patients who experienced an acute posterior glenohumeral joint subluxation and/or dislocation, as well as the aetiology of posterior glenohumeral dislocations, were included.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 100-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1416 - 1423
1 Nov 2018
Rajan PV Qudsi RA Dyer GSM Losina E

Aims

The aim of this study was to assess the quality and scope of the current cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) literature in the field of hand and upper limb orthopaedic surgery.

Materials and Methods

We conducted a systematic review of MEDLINE and the CEA Registry to identify CEAs that were conducted on or after 1 January 1997, that studied a procedure pertaining to the field of hand and upper extremity surgery, that were clinical studies, and that reported outcomes in terms of quality-adjusted life-years. We identified a total of 33 studies that met our inclusion criteria. The quality of these studies was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Analysis (QHES) scale.