Treatment after traumatic shoulder dislocation: a systematic review with a network meta-analysis

Wrestling injuries during the 2016 Rio and 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the injuries of Olympic wrestlers during the 2016 Rio and 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games held in August 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

In this descriptive epidemiological study, injury report forms were used to collect and analyse injury data during the competitions.

RESULTS

During 410 matches in the Rio Olympic Games, 21 injuries were recorded among 346 wrestlers (112=women), a rate of 5.1 injuries/100 bouts and 6.1 injuries/100 athletes. During 322 matches in the Tokyo Olympic Games, 28 injuries were recorded among 287 wrestlers (96=women), with 8.7 injuries/100 bouts and 9.8 injuries/100 athletes. However, these apparent differences in injury rates between Tokyo and Rio were not statistically significant (injuries/bout: p=0.057, 95% CI: 0.31 to 1.02; injuries/athlete: p=0.087, 95% CI: 0.33 to 1.08). Mild injuries comprised the greatest proportion of injuries in both Olympic Games. Severe injuries accounted for 0%, 16.7% and 36.4% of injuries in Greco-Roman, Freestyle and Women's wrestling, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Most wrestling injuries in the 2016 Rio and 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games were mild skin injuries in the head and face regions due to direct body contact during standing positions in the 1/8-final round of wrestling competitions. No critical injury was observed during the recent Olympic Games. Attention should be drawn to preventing upper limb joint dislocations as common severe injuries in both Olympic Games. While not statistically significant, the Tokyo Games, after the COVID-19 pandemic, witnessed a higher injury occurrence than the Rio Games.

Sutures, Screws, Buttons, and Anchors: A Review of Current Bone Graft Fixation Devices for Glenoid Bone Loss in the Unstable Shoulder

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Anterior shoulder instability is associated with concomitant injury to several stabilizing structures of the shoulder, including glenoid bone loss. While instability is most common in young athletes and patients with predisposing conditions of hyperlaxity, recurrent shoulder instability can occur throughout various age ranges and may lead to longer term effects including pain and shoulder arthritis. Glenoid bone loss exceeding certain thresholds is generally treated by glenoid reconstruction via bone block augmentation to adequately stabilize the glenohumeral joint. These procedures increase the width of the articular surface on which the humeral head can translate before dislocation and, based on the procedure performed, provide a sling effect via the conjoined tendon, and increase tension to support the anterior capsule. The purpose of this review is to summarize the available literature regarding bone block fixation techniques.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

Various fixation techniques have been utilized to secure bone block transfers. Though screw fixation has traditionally been used for bone block fixation, suture buttons, suture anchors, and all-suture techniques have been utilized in attempts to avoid complications associated with the use of screws. Biomechanical studies report variable force-resistance, displacement, and mode of failure when comparing screw to suture button-based fixation of glenoid bone blocks. Clinical and radiographic studies have shown these novel suture-based techniques to be comparable, and in some cases advantageous, to traditional screw fixation techniques. While screw fixation has long been the standard of care in glenoid bone block procedures, it is associated with high complication rates, leading surgeons to endeavor toward new fixation techniques. In available biomechanical studies, screw fixation has consistently demonstrated high maximal load-to-failure and displacement with cyclic loading. Studies have reported similar clinical and radiographic outcomes in both screw and suture-based fixation methods, with evidence of reduced bone resorption with suture fixation. While suture button fixation is associated with a higher rate of recurrent instability, overall complication rates are low. Future research should address biomechanical shortcomings of suture-based fixation techniques and continue to assess long-term follow-up of patients treated with each fixation method.

Exploring temporal trends and burden of traumatic shoulder dislocation: a global perspective

Objective

To explore the geographical and temporal trends of traumatic shoulder dislocation, describe the association between the social and demographic factors and the health burden due to traumatic shoulder dislocation, and further investigate its causes.

Methods

Data on traumatic shoulder dislocation was collected from the Global Burden of Disease 2019, spanning the years 1990 to 2019. The epidemiology and disease burden were examined at global, regional, and national levels. Additionally, the age and gender patterns were analyzed, followed by an investigation into the primary causes. Lastly, the study studied the correlation between age-standardized rates and the socio-demographic index (SDI).

Results

Over a span of 30 years, both the crude and age-standardized rates of incidence and years lived with disability (YLDs) rates for all genders displayed a slight fluctuating downward trend. The incidence and YLDs rates in males were consistently higher than those in females. The study analyzed both incidence and YLDs rates of the global, regional, and national of traumatic shoulder dislocations from 1990 to 2019, as well as the temporal trends. Among males, the highest incidence rate was observed in young adulthood, while females exhibited the highest incidence rate in old age. This pattern was mirrored in the YLDs rate. Falls were identified as the main cause contributing to the disease burden related to traumatic shoulder dislocations. Moreover, a positive correlation was found between the age-standardized rates and SDI.

Conclusion

The disease burden of traumatic shoulder dislocation has not significantly decreased from 1990 to 2019. The incidence and YLD rates are associated with age, gender, and SDI. A thorough examination of the disease burden contributes to the efficient allocation and utilization of resources, as well as the development of targeted and effective intervention strategies.

Post-operative rehabilitation following traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: A systematic scoping review

Background

This systematic scoping review aimed to describe the content of post-operative rehabilitation programmes, and outcome measures selection following stabilisation surgery for traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation (TASD).

Methods

An electronic search of Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and AMED was conducted (2000-2021). Any cohort or clinical trial of patients receiving post-operative TASD rehabilitation were included. Study selection, data extraction and quality appraisal were undertaken by two independent reviewers.

Results

Twelve studies including fourteen treatment programmes were eligible. Period of post-operative immobilisation ranged from 1 day to 6 weeks, with exercise introduced between 1 and 7 weeks. Strengthening exercises were introduced between 1 and 12 weeks. Two studies described "accelerated" rehabilitation programmes, differing in immobilisation period and exercise milestones. No increased recurrence was reported in professional footballers. Two studies compared rehabilitation programmes, one not randomised, the other 18 years old. There was variability in selected outcomes measures, with only 4 studies using a common measure.

Discussion

There is minimal evidence to guide post-operative rehabilitation, variability in immobilisation periods and when exercise is introduced. There is no consensus on the definition of accelerated rehabilitation, or outcome measure selection. Clinical consensus of standardised terminology and stages of rehabilitation is required prior to efficacy studies.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair versus conservative treatment for first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Shoulder is vulnerable to dislocation owing to its anatomical structure and the increasing popularity of contact sports in young population. The management of first-time anterior shoulder dislocation in this group is still controversial and the prognosis are varied. This review aimed to compare the results of arthroscopic Bankart repair and conservative management for first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation in young active patients.

METHODS

Databases were searched till November 2021, and comparative studies between arthroscopic Bankart repair and conservative management for first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation in young population were selected. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed according to the Cochrane Back Review Group 12-item scale. Outcome measures included recurrence of instability, return to play, subsequent instability surgery, and shoulder functional scores.

RESULTS

The search returned 12 eligible trials with 786 participants. All the trials were of prospective design. After arthroscopic Bankart repair, patients experienced significantly less re-dislocation (7.5% vs. 53.0%, p < 0.00001, I² = 0%), subluxation (3.1% vs. 24.2%, p < 0.0001, I² = 0%), positive apprehension test (7.3% vs. 25.8%, p = 0.002, I² = 11%), and subsequent surgical treatment for instability (5.6% vs. 37.8%, p < 0.00001, I² = 0%) when compared with those underwent conservative management. And more patients returned to play (83.5% vs. 66.0%, p = 0.03, I² = 81%) after arthroscopic Bankart repair. Outcomes regarding the functional scores did not reach a significant difference between the two cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic Bankart repair showed superiority over conservative management in terms of recurrence, return to play, and subsequent instability surgery during the follow-up in young active patients that encountered first episode of dislocation. As long-term prognosis is comparable, an immediate surgical stabilization might not be suitable for everyone.

The Effect of Blood Flow Restriction Therapy on Shoulder Function Following Shoulder Stabilization Surgery: A Case Series

Background

Traumatic shoulder instability is a common injury in athletes and military personnel. Surgical stabilization reduces recurrence, but athletes often return to sport before recovering upper extremity rotational strength and sport-specific abilities. Blood flow restriction (BFR) may stimulate muscle growth without the need for heavy resistance training post-surgically.

Hypothesis/Purpose

To observe changes in shoulder strength, self-reported function, upper extremity performance, and range of motion (ROM) in military cadets recovering from shoulder stabilization surgery who completed a standard rehabilitation program with six weeks of BFR training.

Study Design

Prospective case series.

Methods

Military cadets who underwent shoulder stabilization surgery completed six weeks of upper extremity BFR training, beginning post-op week six. Primary outcomes were shoulder isometric strength and patient-reported function assessed at 6-weeks, 12-weeks, and 6-months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included shoulder ROM assessed at each timepoint and the Closed Kinetic Chain Upper Extremity Stability Test (CKCUEST), the Upper Extremity Y-Balance Test (UQYBT), and the Unilateral Seated Shotput Test (USPT) assessed at the six-month follow-up.

Results

Twenty cadets performed an average 10.9 BFR training sessions over six weeks. Statistically significant and clinically meaningful increases in surgical extremity external rotation strength (p < 0.001; mean difference, .049; 95% CI: .021, .077), abduction strength (p < 0.001; mean difference, .079; 95% CI: .050, .108), and internal rotation strength (p < 0.001; mean difference, .060; CI: .028, .093) occurred from six to 12 weeks postoperatively. Statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements were reported on the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (p < 0.001; mean difference, 17.7; CI: 9.4, 25.9) and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (p < 0.001; mean difference, -31.1; CI: -44.2, -18.0) from six to 12 weeks postoperatively. Additionally, over 70 percent of participants met reference values on two to three performance tests at 6-months.

Conclusion

While the degree of improvement attributable to the addition of BFR is unknown, the clinically meaningful improvements in shoulder strength, self-reported function, and upper extremity performance warrant further exploration of BFR during upper extremity rehabilitation.

Level of Evidence

4, Case Series.

Athletes with primary glenohumeral instability demonstrate lower rates of bone loss than those with recurrent instability and failed prior stabilization

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare the preoperative magnetic resonance arthrography findings in patients who underwent glenohumeral stabilization with a history of primary instability, recurrent instability, or failed stabilization.

METHODS

All patients who presented with glenohumeral instability and underwent stabilization performed by a single surgeon in our institution between 2008 and 2020 were considered for inclusion in this study. The magnetic resonance arthrography findings of all patients were recorded. Imaging findings were compared between patients with primary instability, those with recurrent instability, and those with failed prior stabilization. P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Overall, 871 patients were included, of whom 814 (93.5%) were male patients; the mean age was 23.1 years (range, 13-57 years). There were 200 patients with primary instability, 571 with recurrent instability, and 100 who required revision stabilization surgery, with no significant differences in demographic characteristics between the groups. A significantly higher amount of glenoid bone loss was noted in patients with recurrent instability (43.4%) and failed prior stabilization (56%) than in those with primary instability (26.5%) (P < .0001). Additionally, a significantly higher number of Hill-Sachs lesions were observed in patients with recurrent instability (70.1%) and failed prior stabilization (89%) than in those with primary instability (67.5%) (P < .0001). We found no significant differences between the groups regarding articular cartilage damage, glenolabral articular disruption, anterior labral periosteal sleeve avulsion, humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligaments, or superior labral anterior-posterior tears (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Patients presenting for stabilization with recurrent instability or following a failed stabilization procedure have higher rates of glenohumeral bone loss than those with primary instability. Therefore, stabilization of primary instability, particularly in high-functioning athletes with a view to preventing recurrence, may reduce the overall progression of glenohumeral bone loss and potential subsequent inferior clinical outcomes.

Long-term effect of immobilization in external rotation after first-time shoulder dislocation: an average 18-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Immobilization in external rotation (ER) after a first-time shoulder dislocation was introduced to reduce the risk of recurrence compared with immobilization in internal rotation (IR), but its efficacy remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to determine the long-term effect of immobilization in ER after a first-time shoulder dislocation.

METHODS

Between October 2000 and March 2004, 198 patients with a first-time anterior dislocation of the shoulder (average age 37) were randomly assigned to immobilization in ER (ER group = 104 shoulders) or IR (IR group = 94 shoulders) for 3 weeks. At an average 2-year follow-up, 159 patients (80.3%) were available for evaluation. In the current study, these 159 patients were further followed up and interviewed by telephone. The following items were evaluated: recurrent instability, apprehensive feeling, surgical intervention, limitation in the range of motion, return to sports, and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score.

RESULTS

The average follow-up period was 18.2 years (range, 16-20 years). Fifty-six patients were available for follow-up with the follow-up rate of 35%. The number of recurrent patients was 6 of 27 (22%) in the ER group and 6 of 29 (21%) in the IR group (P = .889). The number of surgically stabilized patients was 3 of 27 (11%) in the ER group and 10 of 29 (34%) in the IR group (P = .038). In total, the recurrence rate was 33% (9 of 27) in the ER group and 55% (16 of 29) in the IR group (P = .100). Adding the surgical cases and those with the SANE score ≤70% as failure cases, the failure rate in the ER group (26%) was significantly lower than that in the IR group (52%) (P = .048). Among those who survived without surgical intervention, there were no significant differences in apprehensive feeling, return to sports, limited range of motion, and the SANE score between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Immobilization in ER reduced the risk of surgical intervention compared with IR in the long term.

Gender differences in female and male Australian Football injuries - A prospective observational study of emergency department presentations

OBJECTIVES

To compare injury-profiles of females and males presenting to Emergency Departments (EDs) with an Australian Football injury.

DESIGN

Prospective observational study.

METHODS

All patients presenting to one of 10 EDs in Victoria, Australia, with an Australian Football injury were included in the study. Data were prospectively collected over a 10 month period, coinciding with a complete Australian Football season, including pre-season training and practice matches. Relevant information was extracted from patient medical records regarding injury-type, body part injured, investigations and treatments required. Female and male data were compared with chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

1635 patients were included, of whom 242 (14.8%) were female. Females had a higher proportion of hand/finger injuries (34.3% v 23.4%), neck injuries (6.6% v 2.5%) and patella dislocations (2.9% v 0.6%). Males had a higher proportion of shoulder injuries (11.5% v 5.8%), skin lacerations (8.0% v 1.7%), and thorax/abdominal/pelvic injuries (5.7% v 2.1%). Concussion rates were similar between the genders, occurring in 14.1% of all patients. Anterior cruciate ligament injuries were infrequent (1.0%) and not significantly different between genders. Females received more imaging investigations (83.1% v 74.7%) and analgesia (62.4% v 48.5%). A higher proportion of males required admission to hospital (5.0% v 2.1%), usually for surgery.

CONCLUSION

Australian Football injury profiles differed between females and males. Gender-specific injury prevention and management programs would be indicated based on the study findings.

Off-track Hill-Sachs lesions predispose to recurrence after nonoperative management of first-time anterior shoulder dislocations

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the presence of an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion has an impact on the recurrence rate after nonoperative management of first-time anterior shoulder dislocations.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was planned with a follow-up via questionnaire after a minimum of 24 months. Fifty four patients were included in the study (mean age: 29.5 years; 16 female, 38 male). All of these patients opted for primary nonoperative management after first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation, in some cases even against the clinician's advice. The glenoid track and the Hill-Sachs interval were evaluated in the MRI scans. The clinical outcome was evaluated via a shoulder-specific questionnaire, ASES-Score and Constant Score. Further, patients were asked to report on recurrent dislocation (yes/no), time to recurrent dislocation, pain, feeling of instability and satisfaction with nonoperative management.

RESULTS

In 7 (13%) patients, an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion was present, while in 36 (67%) the lesion was on-track and 11 (20%) did not have a structural Hill-Sachs lesion at all. In total, 31 (57%) patients suffered recurrent dislocations. In the off-track group, all shoulders dislocated again (100%), while 21 (58%) in the on-track group and 3 (27%) in the no structural Hill--Sachs lesion group had a recurrent dislocation, p = 0.008. The mean age in the group with a recurrence was 23.7 ± 10.1 years, while those patients without recurrent dislocation were 37.4 ± 13.1 years old, p < 0.01. The risk for recurrence in patients under 30 years of age was higher than in those older than 30 years (OR = 12.66, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between patients with on- and off-track lesions regarding patients' sex, height, weight and time to reduction and glenoid diameter. Off-track patients were younger than on-track patients (24.9 ± 7.3 years vs. 29.6 ± 13.6 years). However, this difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

The presence of an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion leads to significantly higher recurrence rates compared to on-track or no structural Hill--Sachs lesions in patients with nonoperative management and should be considered when choosing the right treatment option. Therefore, surgical intervention should be considered in patients with off-track Hill-Sachs lesions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Immobilisation in external rotation after first-time traumatic anterior shoulder instability reduces recurrent instability: a meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Cadaveric and MRI findings have demonstrated significantly less labral separation and displacement when the shoulder is placed in external rotation as compared with internal rotation.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the current study is to meta-analyse the randomised controlled trials in the literature to compare immobilisation in external versus internal rotation after first-time anterior shoulder dislocation.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library was performed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Randomised controlled trials comparing immobilisation in external rotation versus internal rotation for first-time anterior shoulder dislocation were included.

FINDINGS

Nine randomised controlled trials with 795 patients were included. The mean age of included patients was 29 years, 82.4% were male and the mean follow-up was 25.5 months. As compared with immobilisation in internal rotation, compliance was significantly higher (74.5% vs 67.4%, p=0.01), and the rate of recurrent dislocations was significantly lower (22.2% vs 33.4%, p=0.02) with immobilisation in external rotation. Additionally, in patients 20-40 years old the rate of recurrent dislocations was significantly lower in those treated with immobilisation in external rotation than internal rotation (12.1% vs 31.4%, p=0.006). Immobilisation in external rotation also resulted in a higher rate of return to preinjury level of play (60.1% vs 42.6%, p=0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Immobilisation of the shoulder in external rotation after a traumatic first-time anterior shoulder dislocation results in a higher compliance rate, a lower recurrent dislocation rate and a higher rate of return to play as compared with immobilisation in internal rotation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Maximal Medical Improvement Following Shoulder Stabilization Surgery May Require up to 1 Year: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

There is increased emphasis on properly allocating healthcare resources to optimize value within orthopedic surgery. Establishing time to maximal medical improvement (MMI) can inform clinical decision-making and practice guidelines.

PURPOSE

We sought (1) to evaluate the time to MMI as predicted by commonly used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for evaluation of shoulder stabilization and (2) to evaluate typical time to return to sports and employment following surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review of the Medline database was conducted to identify outcome studies reporting sequential follow-up at multiple time points, up to a minimum of 2 years after shoulder stabilization surgery. The included studies examined the outcomes of arthroscopic or open surgical techniques on anterior instability. Clinically significant improvements were evaluated utilizing the minimal clinically important difference specific to each PROM. Secondary outcomes included range of motion, return to sport/work, and recurrent instability.

RESULTS

Ten studies comprising 590 surgically managed cases of anterior shoulder instability were included (78% arthroscopic, 22% open). Clinically significant improvements in PROMs were achieved up to 1 year post-operatively for Rowe, Western Ontario Instability Index (WOSI), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores. For the three most utilized tools (Rowe, WOSI, ASES), the majority of improvement occurred in the first 6 post-operative months. Clinically significant improvements in Constant Score and Oxford Shoulder Instability Score (OSIS) were achieved up to 6 months and 2 years after surgery, respectively. No clinically significant improvements were achieved on the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) tool.

CONCLUSION

Maximal medical improvement as determined by commonly utilized PROMs occurs by 1 year after operative management of anterior shoulder instability. The DASH tool does not appear to demonstrate a reliable time frame for clinically significant outcome improvement.

Traumatic Primary Anterior Glenohumeral Joint Dislocation in Sports: A Systematic Review of Operative versus Nonoperative Management

Anterior shoulder (glenohumeral joint [GHJ]) dislocations are relatively common injuries in sports. Previous studies have evaluated clinical outcomes of operative and nonoperative management for primary traumatic anterior GHJ dislocations. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature in an effort to provide a thorough analysis of patients after undergoing closed reduction of a traumatic anterior GHJ dislocation, particularly among the athletic population. Two independent reviewers performed a comprehensive search of PubMed and the Cochrane Library through February 23, 2020. Unfortunately, the quantity and quality of published articles on this subject is very limited. In many studies, younger age (between 21 and 30 years) was associated with greater risk for recurrence of GHJ dislocations. Twelve studies (total N = 753) directly compared outcomes of operative versus nonoperative management. It seems that operative management significantly reduces recurrence rates with patients treated operatively among the young and active population. Operative management should be considered as a treatment option for young and athletic patients presenting with a first-time anterior GHJ dislocation.

First-time Glenohumeral Dislocations: Current Evidence and Considerations in Clinical Decision Making

The decision to manage first-time shoulder dislocations conservatively or operatively has become increasingly complex because of conflicting literature. Although shoulder dislocations have traditionally been managed with reduction and immobilization, recent evidence has suggested high rates of subsequent recurrence. Surgical intervention is thought to better restore stability and decrease recurrence rates; however, it also has the potential for additional morbidity and financial cost. As such, recent literature has sought to better define patient risk profiles to identify optimal candidates for both conservative and operative management. The purpose of the current review is to provide a comprehensive and evidence-based assessment of the most recent literature to better delineate an appropriate treatment algorithm for this challenging clinical scenario.

The efficacy of a phone assistance nursing program for functional outcomes in patients after shoulder instability surgery: A protocol for randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

We conduct this research protocol for the assessment of the effect of phone-assisted care programs on functional outcomes in patients receiving shoulder instability surgery.

METHODS

This is a randomized controlled, single center trial which will be implemented from October 2020 to December 2021. This trial is conducted according to the SPIRIT Checklist of randomized researches. It was authorized via the Ethics Committee of the First People's Hospital of Xiangyang city affiliated to Hubei Medical College (XY234-026). Ninety participants who undergo shoulder instability surgery are analyzed. Patients are randomly divided into control group (standard management group, with 45 patients) and study group (the phone program group, with 45 patients). In control group, the exercises at home are not monitored. Whereas in study group, patients are asked about their at-home activities, and the extra coaching sessions are provided to patients on self-care, exercise guidance, and the importance of exercise at home, and then answers to their questions. The primary outcome is the range of motion of the shoulder joint, and the pain arcs are determined through the range of motion. The extra assessments include the shoulder functional outcome, pain, and the quality of life. All the analysis needed in this study is implemented with SPSS (IBM, Chicago, USA) for Windows Version 19.0.

RESULTS

The clinical outcome variables between groups are shown in Table.

CONCLUSION

This investigation can offer a reliable basis for the effectiveness of phone assistance nursing program in patients after shoulder instability surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

researchregistry6010.

Immobilization in External Rotation Reduces the Risk of Recurrence After Primary Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: A Meta-analysis

Background

The best method for nonsurgical treatment after primary dislocation of the shoulder is not clear. The efficacy of immobilization with the arm in external rotation (ER) compared with internal rotation (IR) remains controversial.

Purpose

To determine the efficacy of ER immobilization versus IR immobilization on recurrence rate after primary dislocation of the shoulder from the evidence of randomized controlled trials.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 2.

Methods

Electronic databases (MEDLINE [Ovid SP], PubMed, Web of Science, EBM reviews, and CINAHL) and available proceedings according to the abstracts of major international meetings related to or including shoulder injuries and trauma were used to search for randomized controlled trials. Two independent investigators determined eligibility and carried out data extraction from the selected studies.

Results

A total of 9 studies (817 patients) were selected for this meta-analysis. They included 668 male and 149 female patients, with a mean age ranging from 20.3 to 37.5 years. In the 9 pooled studies, the recurrence rate of shoulder dislocation was 21.5% (84/390) in the ER group versus 34.9% (130/373) in the IR group. ER immobilization significantly reduced the recurrence rate compared with IR immobilization (risk ratio, 0.56; P = .007). In the subgroup analysis of those immobilized full-time, ER immobilization was significantly more effective than IR immobilization in reducing the recurrence rate (risk ratio, 0.57; P = .01). In the subgroup analysis of age, ER immobilization was significantly more effective than IR immobilization in those aged 20 to 40 years but not in those younger than 20 years.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis demonstrates that ER immobilization reduces the recurrence rate after primary shoulder dislocation compared with IR immobilization in patients older than 20 years. When treating a patient with primary shoulder dislocation, the clinician should provide this information to the patient before a treatment method is selected.

Neuromuscular Exercises Improve Shoulder Function More Than Standard Care Exercises in Patients With a Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background:

There is an important gap in knowledge about the effectiveness of nonoperative treatment (exercise) for patients with traumatic primary and recurrent anterior shoulder dislocations (ASDs).

Purpose/Hypothesis:

The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of physical therapist–supervised, shoulder instability neuromuscular exercise (SINEX) versus self-managed, home-based, standard care shoulder exercise (HOMEX) in patients with traumatic ASDs. The hypothesis was that SINEX would have a larger effect and fewer adverse events compared with HOMEX.

Study Design:

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.

Methods:

A total of 56 participants with radiographically verified, trauma-initiated primary or recurrent ASDs and self-reported decreased shoulder function were randomized to 12 weeks of either SINEX or HOMEX. The SINEX program consisted of 7 exercises, individually progressing from basic (2 × 20 repetitions each day) to elite (2 × 10 repetitions, 3 times weekly). The HOMEX program included 5 shoulder exercises performed 3 times weekly (2 × 10 repetitions). The primary outcome was the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) score, ranging from 0 (best possible) to 2100. The between-group minimal clinically important difference at 12 weeks was 250 points. Secondary outcomes included WOSI subdomain scores, patient-reported ratings of kinesiophobia and pain, objective shoulder function, patient satisfaction, and number of adverse events.

Results:

The between-group mean difference in the WOSI total score at 12 weeks significantly favored SINEX over HOMEX (–228.1 [95% CI, –430.5 to –25.6]). SINEX was furthermore superior to HOMEX in most of the secondary outcomes (3/4 subdomains of the WOSI and pain level during the past 7 days as well as clinical signs of anterior shoulder instability). Also, although not statistically significant, less than half the proportion of the SINEX patients compared with the HOMEX patients (3/27 [11%] vs 6/24 [25%], respectively; P = .204) underwent or were referred for shoulder stabilizing surgery. Satisfaction with both exercise programs was high, and no serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusion:

Neuromuscular shoulder exercise (SINEX) was superior to standard care exercise (HOMEX) in patients with traumatic ASDs. Further long-term follow-ups on treatment effects are needed.

Registration:

NCT02371928 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Conservative management following closed reduction of traumatic anterior dislocation of the shoulder

BACKGROUND

Acute anterior shoulder dislocation, which is the most common type of dislocation, usually results from an injury. Subsequently, the shoulder is less stable and is more susceptible to re-dislocation or recurrent instability (e.g. subluxation), especially in active young adults. After closed reduction, most of these injuries are treated with immobilisation of the injured arm in a sling or brace for a few weeks, followed by exercises. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2006 and last updated in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of conservative interventions after closed reduction of traumatic anterior dislocation of the shoulder. These might include immobilisation, rehabilitative interventions or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PEDro and trial registries. We also searched conference proceedings and reference lists of included studies. Date of last search: May 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing conservative interventions with no treatment, a different intervention or a variant of the intervention (e.g. a different duration) for treating people after closed reduction of a primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation. Inclusion was regardless of age, sex or mechanism of injury. Primary outcomes were re-dislocation, patient-reported shoulder instability measures and return to pre-injury activities. Secondary outcomes included participant satisfaction, health-related quality of life, any instability and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Both review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. We pooled results of comparable groups of studies. We assessed risk of bias with the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and the quality of the evidence with the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven trials (six randomised controlled trials and one quasi-randomised controlled trial) with 704 participants; three of these trials (234 participants) are new to this update. The mean age across the trials was 29 years (range 12 to 90 years), and 82% of the participants were male. All trials compared immobilisation in external rotation (with or without an additional abduction component) versus internal rotation (the traditional method) following closed reduction. No trial evaluated any other interventions or comparisons, such as rehabilitation. All trials provided data for a follow-up of one year or longer; the commonest length was two years or longer.All trials were at some risk of bias, commonly performance and detection biases given the lack of blinding. Two trials were at high risk of selection bias and some trials were affected by attrition bias for some outcomes. We rated the certainty of the evidence as very low for all outcomes.We are uncertain whether immobilisation in external rotation makes a difference to the risk of re-dislocation after 12 months' or longer follow-up compared with immobilisation in internal rotation (55/245 versus 73/243; risk ratio (RR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 1.19; 488 participants; 6 studies; I² = 61%; very low certainty evidence). In a moderate-risk population with an illustrative risk of 312 per 1000 people experiencing a dislocation in the internal rotation group, this equates to 103 fewer (95% CI 194 fewer to 60 more) re-dislocations after immobilisation in external rotation. Thus this result covers the possibility of a benefit for each intervention.Individually, the four studies (380 participants) reporting on validated patient-reported outcome measures for shoulder instability at a minimum of 12 months' follow-up found no evidence of a clinically important difference between the two interventions.We are uncertain of the relative effects of the two methods of immobilisation on resumption of pre-injury activities or sports. One study (169 participants) found no evidence of a difference between interventions in the return to pre-injury activity of the affected arm. Two studies (135 participants) found greater return to sports in the external rotation group in a subgroup of participants who had sustained their injury during sports activities.None of the trials reported on participant satisfaction or health-related quality of life.We are uncertain whether there is a difference between the two interventions in the number of participants experiencing instability, defined as either re-dislocation or subluxation (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.14; 395 participants, 3 studies; very low certainty evidence).Data on adverse events were collected only in an ad hoc way in the seven studies. Reported "transient and resolved adverse events" were nine cases of shoulder stiffness or rigidity in the external rotation group and two cases of axillary rash in the internal rotation group. There were three "important" adverse events: hyperaesthesia and moderate hand pain; eighth cervical dermatome paraesthesia; and major movement restriction between 6 and 12 months. It was unclear to what extent these three events could be attributed to the treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence from randomised trials is limited to that comparing immobilisation in external versus internal rotation. Overall, the evidence is insufficient to draw firm conclusions about whether immobilisation in external rotation confers any benefit over immobilisation in internal rotation.Considering that there are several unpublished and ongoing trials evaluating immobilisation in external versus internal rotation, the main priority for research on this question consists of the publication of completed trials and the completion and publication of ongoing trials. Meanwhile, evaluation of other interventions, including rehabilitation, is warranted. There is a need for sufficiently large, good-quality, well-reported randomised controlled trials with long-term follow-up. Future research should aim to determine the optimal immobilisation duration, precise indications for immobilisation, optimal rehabilitation interventions, and the acceptability of these different interventions.