Immobilization in external rotation after primary shoulder dislocation did not reduce the risk of recurrence: a randomized controlled trial

Shoulder Injuries in Pediatric Athletes

Shoulder injuries in pediatric athletes are typically caused by acute or overuse injuries. The developing structures of the shoulder lead to injury patterns that are distinct from those of adult athletes. Overuse injuries often affect the physeal structures of the proximal humerus and can lead to pain and loss of sports participation. Shoulder instability is common in pediatric athletes, and recurrence is also a concern in this population. Fractures of the proximal humerus and clavicle are typically treated with conservative management, but there is a trend toward surgical intervention.

Immobilization in External Rotation Versus Internal Rotation After Primary Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

The recurrence rate after primary anterior shoulder dislocation is high, especially in young, active individuals. Recent studies have suggested external rotation immobilization as a method to reduce the rate of recurrent shoulder dislocation in comparison to traditional sling immobilization.

PURPOSE

To assess and summarize evidence from randomized controlled trials on the effect of internal rotation versus external rotation immobilization on the rate of recurrence after primary anterior shoulder dislocation.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and abstracts from recent proceedings were searched for eligible studies. Two reviewers selected studies for inclusion, assessed methodological quality, and extracted data.

RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials (632 patients) were included in this review. Demographic and prognostic variables measured at baseline were similar in the pooled groups. The average age was 30.1 years in the pooled external rotation group and 30.3 years in the pooled internal rotation group. Two studies found that external rotation immobilization reduced the rate of recurrence after initial anterior shoulder dislocation compared with conventional internal rotation immobilization, whereas 4 studies failed to find a significant difference between the 2 groups. This meta-analysis suggested no overall significant difference in the rate of recurrence among patients treated with internal rotation versus external rotation immobilization (risk ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.42-1.14; P = .15). There was no significant difference in the rate of compliance between internal and external rotation immobilization (P = .43). The Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index scores were pooled across 3 studies, and there was no significant difference between the 2 groups (P = .54).

CONCLUSION

Immobilization in external rotation is not significantly more effective in reducing the recurrence rate after primary anterior shoulder dislocation than immobilization in internal rotation. Additionally, this review suggests that there is minimal difference in patients' perceptions of their health-related quality of life after immobilization in internal versus external rotation.

Effect of glenohumeral position on contact pressure between the capsulolabral complex and the glenoid in free ALPSA and Bankart lesions

PURPOSE

Anterior shoulder dislocation is a common injury, but the optimal management of dislocation remains controversial. We hypothesized that reducing the shoulder in externally rotated position would aid the reduction in capsulolabral lesions. Thus, in this study, contact pressure between the capsulolabral lesion and the glenoid in free ALPSA and Bankart lesions was measured using a cadaver model.

METHODS

In 10 specimens, the humerus was externally rotated by abduction on the coronal plane to measure the contact pressure between the capsulolabral complex and glenoid in free ALPSA and Bankart lesions using a Tekscan pressure system. Stability of the joint was confirmed using the Vicon motion analysis system.

RESULTS

In the normal shoulder joint, the peak pressure between the subscapularis muscle and the anterior capsule according to the location of the glenohumeral joint decreased to 83.4 ± 21.2 kPa in the 0° abduction and -30° external rotation positions and showed a 300.7 ± 42.9 kPa peak value in the 60° abduction and 60° external rotation positions. In both free ALPSA and Bankart lesions, the lowest pressure between the labral lesion and the glenoid was measured at 0° abduction and -30° external rotation, and the highest pressure was recorded at 60° external rotation and 60° abduction.

CONCLUSION

The contact pressure between the capsulolabral complex and the glenoid significantly increased when the abduction and external rotation angles were increased. Based on our results, the conservative management in free ALPSA lesions would respond better than Bankart lesions.

IRB OR ETHICAL COMMITTEE APPROVAL

YWMR-12-0-038.

Primary anterior dislocation of the shoulder: long-term prognosis at the age of 40 years or younger

PURPOSE

We describe the long-term prognosis in 257 first-time anterior shoulder dislocations (255 patients, aged 12-40 years) registered at 27 Swedish emergency units between 1978 and 1979.

METHODS

Half the shoulders were immobilised for 3-4 weeks after repositioning. Follow-ups were performed after two (questionnaire), five (questionnaire), 10 (questionnaire and radiology) and 25 (questionnaire and radiology) years in 227 patients (229 shoulders). Twenty-eight patients died during the 25 years of observation.

RESULTS

Early movement or immobilisation after the primary dislocation resulted in the same long-term prognosis. Recurrences increased up to 10 years of follow-up, but, after 25 years, 29 % of the shoulders with ≥2 recurrences appeared to have stabilised over time. Arthropathy increased from 9 % moderate to severe and 11 % mild at 10 years, to 34 % moderate to severe and 27 % mild after 25 years. Alcoholics had a poorer prognosis with respect to dislocation arthropathy (P < 0.001). Age <25 years and/or bilateral instability represent a poorer prognosis, where stabilising surgery is necessary in every second shoulder. Fracture of the greater tuberosity means a good prognosis, and we have found no evidence that athletic activity, gender, a Hill-Sachs lesion and minor rim fractures had any prognostic impact. During the 25 years in which these patients were followed, 28/255 died (11 %), representing a mortality rate (SMR) that was more than double that of the general Swedish population (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Almost half of all first-time dislocations at the age of <25 years will have stabilising surgery and two-thirds will develop different stages of arthropathy within 25 years.

[Abduction/external rotation immobilization after primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: which ortheses are suitable?]

BACKGROUND

Immobilization of the shoulder in 60 ° external rotation and 30 ° abduction after primary anterior shoulder dislocation has been shown to allow anatomical reduction and potential healing of the capsule-labrum complex. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate commercially available shoulder braces concerning functionality and comfort as well as for potential problems.

METHODS

In this study ten healthy subjects (6 female, 4 male and average age 23 years) tested four braces: 1. Omo Immobil (Ottobock), 2. Quadrat (DJO Global), 3. MP Airplane Axilla (Horst Rattenhuber GmbH) and 4. ARC XR (Bledsoe Brace Systems) with respect to functionality and comfort. Each subject completed simulated activities of daily living (ADLs) and a the end of each ADL the subject evaluated comfort, difficulty of the activities and potential pain on a points scale. The position or the change of the position were controlled by digital photographs. Additionally it was checked whether the subjects could actively change the position of the brace contrary to the desired position.

RESULTS

Braces 3 and 4 were rated significantly more comfortable (p < 0.05). Even the difficulty of the activities was rated lower and in particular putting on and taking off the braces was assessed to be significantly easier in comparison to braces 1 and 2. In addition, differences of potential pain were statistically significant and pain was experienced only with braces 1 and 2. The measuring of the position showed no significant differences (p > 0.05). For braces 1 and 2 the active change of the position by subjects was significantly higher and the arm could be rotated more against the favored position (p < 0.05). Between braces 3 and 4, there were no statistical differences during the whole evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Ortheses where the main joint is positioned in and not in front of the axilla or which can ensure a jointless stabilization of the shoulder or which allow an improved position by an additional sling on the opposite shoulder, are most qualified for immobilization of the shoulder in an external rotation/abduction position with respect to functionality and comfort.

Does external rotation bracing for anterior shoulder dislocation actually result in reduction of the labrum? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

External rotation (ER) bracing has been shown to improve labral reduction in cadaveric studies, but this has not translated to universal improvement in re-dislocation rates in clinical series.

PURPOSE

To systematically review and critically appraise the literature that investigates how well the labrum is actually reduced by ER in patients who have had an anterior shoulder dislocation.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature using the online databases Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register. Studies were included if they reported on the difference in labral reduction after ER and internal rotation bracing in patients who had a traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation.

RESULTS

Of the 6 studies included, 5 assessed labral reduction on magnetic resonance imaging and 1 arthroscopically. Each study reported an overall improvement in labral reduction with ER, but anatomic reduction was not commonly achieved. This was despite the use of extreme positions that are unlikely to be well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

External rotation results in anatomic reduction of the labrum in only 35% of cases. We postulate that failure to reduce the labrum may be a contraindication to ER bracing and propose further study to determine whether acute MRI could be used to help identify patients in whom ER achieves labral reduction in a comfortable position. This approach also has the advantage of avoiding the significant inconvenience of ER bracing in those in whom the labrum does not reduce and are therefore theoretically less likely to benefit. However, it is a novel strategy with significant resource implications and therefore warrants further study.

Arm Abduction Provides a Better Reduction of the Bankart Lesion During Immobilization in External Rotation After an Initial Shoulder Dislocation

BACKGROUND

Shoulder dislocation often recurs, especially in the younger population. Immobilization in external rotation, in which a Bankart lesion is displaced in the anterior, medial, and inferior directions, was introduced as a new method of nonoperative treatment, but its clinical efficiency is controversial. In terms of reducing the lesion, it is reasonable to incorporate not only external rotation, which makes the anterior soft tissues tight to push the lesion posteriorly and laterally, but also abduction, which makes the inferior soft tissues tight to push the lesion superiorly.

HYPOTHESIS

Abducting the arm during immobilization in external rotation will improve the reduction of a Bankart lesion.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

There were 37 patients with initial shoulder dislocation enrolled in this study. After reduction, MRI was taken in 4 positions of the shoulder: adduction and internal rotation (Add-IR), adduction and external rotation (Add-ER), 30° of abduction and 30° of external rotation (Abd-30ER), and 30° of abduction and 60° of external rotation (Abd-60ER). On radial slices, the separation, displacement of the labrum, and opening angle of the capsule were measured.

RESULTS

Add-ER improved the reduction of the anterior labrum but not the inferior labrum when compared with Add-IR. Both Abd-30ER and Abd-60ER improved the reduction of the inferior labrum as compared with Add-IR. Furthermore, Abd-60ER improved the reduction more than Add-ER.

CONCLUSION

Among the 4 positions tested, Abd-60ER is the best position in terms of reducing the Bankart lesion.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Abducting the shoulder during immobilization in external rotation is demonstrated to improve the reduction of the Bankart lesion. Therefore, this position is expected to reduce the recurrence rate after initial dislocation of the shoulder. Future clinical trials are necessary.

Management of primary anterior shoulder dislocations using immobilization

Reference/Citation : Paterson WH, Throckmorton TW, Koester M, Azar FM, Kuhn JE. Position and duration of immobilization after primary anterior shoulder dislocation: a systemic review and meta-analysis of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92(18):2924-2933.

CLINICAL QUESTION

Does an optimum duration and position of immobilization after primary anterior shoulder dislocation exist for reducing recurrence rates?

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched up to December 2009 without limitations. The search terms for all databases used were shoulder AND dislocation and shoulder AND immobilization.

STUDY SELECTION

Criteria used to include articles were (1) English language, (2) prospective level I or level II studies (according to Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery guidelines), (3) nonoperative management of initial anterior shoulder dislocation, (4) minimum follow-up of 1 year, and (5) rate of recurrent dislocation as a reported outcome.

DATA EXTRACTION

A standardized evaluation method was used to extract data to allow assessment of methods issues and statistical analysis to determine sources of bias. The primary outcome was the recurrence rate after nonoperative management of anterior shoulder dislocation. Additional data extracted and used in subanalyses included duration and position of immobilization and age at the time of initial dislocation. Data were analyzed to determine associations among groups using 2-tailed Fisher exact tests. For pooled categorical data, relative risk of recurrent dislocation, 95% confidence intervals, and heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic and χ(2) tests were calculated for individual studies. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to combine studies and estimate overall relative risk of recurrent dislocation and 95% confidence intervals. The statistical difference between duration of immobilization and position was determined using z tests for overall effect. Pooled results were presented as forest plots.

MAIN RESULTS

In the initial search of the databases, the authors identified 2083 articles. A total of 9 studies met all of the criteria and were included in this review. In most of the studies, age was a risk factor for recurrence. Patients less than 30 years of age were more likely to sustain a recurrent dislocation than patients more than 30 years of age. In 5 studies (n = 1215), researchers found no difference in recurrence of shoulder dislocation when immobilized in internal rotation (IR) for less than 1 week (41%, 40 of 97) compared with more than 3 weeks (37%, 34 of 93) in patients less than 30 years of age (P = .52). Authors of 3 studies (n = 289) compared the effect of immobilization in IR versus external rotation (ER), and whereas they found no statistical difference, a trend appeared toward reduced recurrence rates in ER but not IR (P = .07). The rate of recurrent dislocation was 40% (25 of 63) in patients treated with IR sling immobilization and 25% (22 of 88) in patients immobilized in ER.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the investigators found that younger age (<30 years) was a predictor of recurrent dislocations, immobilization for more than 1 week did not improve recurrence rates, and an apparent trend existed toward decreased recurrence rates with ER rather than IR. According to the review and meta-analysis by Paterson et al, the level of evidence for recommendations regarding optimal duration and position of immobilization to reduce the risk of recurrent dislocation was therapeutic level II. This level of evidence was appropriate because the review included only prospective studies of level I or II and a minimum follow-up of 1 year.

Low-cost alternative external rotation shoulder brace and review of treatment in acute shoulder dislocations

Traumatic dislocations of the shoulder commonly present to emergency departments (EDs). Immediate closed reduction of both anterior and posterior glenohumeral dislocations is recommended and is frequently performed in the ED. Recurrence of dislocation is common, as anteroinferior labral tears (Bankart lesions) are present in many anterior shoulder dislocations.14,15,18,23 Immobilization of the shoulder following closed reduction is therefore recommended; previous studies support the use of immobilization with the shoulder in a position of external rotation, for both anterior and posterior shoulder dislocations.7-11,19 In this study, we present a technique for assembling a low-cost external rotation shoulder brace using materials found in most hospitals: cotton roll, stockinette, and shoulder immobilizers. This brace is particularly suited for the uninsured patient, who lacks the financial resources to pay for a pre-fabricated brace out of pocket. We also performed a cost analysis for our low-cost external rotation shoulder brace, and a cost comparison with pre-fabricated brand name braces. At our institution, the total materials cost for our brace was $19.15. The cost of a pre-fabricated shoulder brace at our institution is $150 with markup, which is reimbursed on average at $50.40 according to our hospital billing data. The low-cost external rotation shoulder brace is therefore a more affordable option for the uninsured patient presenting with acute shoulder dislocation.

Approach to the treatment of primary anterior shoulder dislocation: A review

Glenohumeral joint dislocation is common among younger, active patients. Anterior dislocation is the most common direction of instability following a traumatic event. Due to a high rate of recurrence following primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation, an evidence-based approach is necessary to determine the best treatment regime for a patient presenting with this problem. A history, physical examination, and radiographic imaging can help guide treatment recommendations by determining the extent of soft tissue damage following dislocation. Controversies in the treatment of the first-time dislocator include the length and position of immobilization following dislocation, and the role of initial surgical stabilization. This article outlines the treatment options for the first-time glenohumeral dislocator, with an emphasis on the available evidence in the literature. Where applicable, the criteria known as the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy were used to summarize the strength of evidence available for recommendations.

Management of recent first-time anterior shoulder dislocations

The management of a first episode of anterior shoulder dislocation starts with an analysis of the causative mechanism and a physical examination to establish the diagnosis. Based on the findings, the case can be classified as simple or accompanied with complications, most notably vascular or nerve injuries. Two radiographs perpendicular to each other should be obtained to confirm the diagnosis then repeated after the reduction manoeuvres. Additional imaging studies may be needed to assess concomitant bony lesions (impaction lesions or fractures). External reduction should always be attempted after premedication appropriate for the severity of the pain. General anaesthesia may be necessary. There is no consensus regarding the optimal reduction technique, although the need for gentle manoeuvres that do not cause pain is universally recognised. Immobilisation currently involves keeping the elbow by the side with the arm internally rotated for 3-6weeks depending on patient age. Vessel and nerve injuries are rare but can cause major functional impairments. Follow-up evaluations are in order to check the recovery of normal function, which may be more difficult to achieve in patients with concomitant lesions; and to detect recurrent shoulder instability and rotator cuff lesions. At the acute phase, surgery is indicated only in patients with complications or after failure of the reduction manoeuvres. Shoulder immobilisation with the arm externally rotated and surgical treatment of the first episode are controversial strategies that are discussed herein.

Survey on the management of acute first-time anterior shoulder dislocation amongst Dutch public hospitals

INTRODUCTION

The primary aim of this study was to record how orthopaedic surgeons are currently managing acute first-time anterior shoulder dislocation (AFASD) 8 years after introduction of the Dutch national guideline: "acute primary shoulder dislocation, diagnostics and treatment" in 2005. The second aim was to evaluate how these surgeons treat recurrent instability after AFASD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online questionnaire regarding the management of AFASD and recurrent shoulder instability was held amongst orthopaedic surgeons of all 98 Dutch hospitals.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 60%. Of the respondents, 75% had a local protocol for managing AFASD, of which 28% had made changes in their treatment protocol after the introduction of the national guideline. The current survey showed wide variety in the overall treatment policies for AFASD. Twenty-seven percent of the orthopaedic surgeons were currently unaware of the national guideline. The variability in treatment for AFASD was present throughout the whole treatment from which policy at the emergency department; when to operate for recurrent instability; type of surgical technique for stabilization and type of fixation of the labrum. As for the treatment of recurrent instability, the same variability was seen: 36% of the surgeons perform only arthroscopic procedures, 7% only open and 57% perform both open and arthroscopic procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the introduction of the national guideline for the initial management of AFASD in 2005, still great variety among orthopaedic surgeons in the Netherlands was present. As for the surgical stabilization technique, the vast majority of the respondents are performing an arthroscopic shoulder stabilization procedure at the expense of the more traditional open procedure as a first treatment option for post-traumatic shoulder instability.

The external rotation immobilisation does not reduce recurrence rates or improve quality of life after primary anterior shoulder dislocation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomised controlled trials directly comparing (1) the rates of recurrence and (2) patient-based quality-of-life assessments after the external rotation (ER) or internal rotation (IR) immobilisation after primary anterior shoulder dislocation.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and ISI Web of Science were searched up to January 2013, using the Boolean operators as follows: (bankart lesion OR shoulder anterior dislocation) AND ((external rotation AND internal rotation) OR immobilisation). All prospective randomised controlled trials directly comparing recurrence rate and patient-based quality-of-life assessments between the ER and IR immobilisations were retrieved. No limitation of the language or publication year existed in our analysis.

RESULTS

Seven of 896 studies involving 663 patients were included, 338 in the ER group and 325 in the IR group. No significant difference was observed in the recurrence rate at all ages (risk ratio (RR)=0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-1.03; p=0.067), at the age stratum of ≤30 years (RR=0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-1.29; p=0.250) and >30 years (RR=0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-1.97; p=0.722). Four trials adopted quality-of-life assessments, using the Constant-Murlay functional scoring system, the Rowe scoring system, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability index (WOSI), the Disabilities of arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons evaluation form (ASES). Only one trial demonstrated borderline statistical significance (p=0.05) and probable superiority of the ER group based on the ASES. No significant difference was observed in other three trials.

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of our analysis, the ER immobilisation could not reduce the rates of recurrence after primary anterior shoulder dislocation or improve the quality of life compared with the IR immobilisation. More rigorous and adequately powered prospective randomised controlled trials with long-term follow-ups are required to elucidate a more objective outcome.

The supine apprehension test helps predict the risk of recurrent instability after a first-time anterior shoulder dislocation

BACKGROUND

We previously identified the positive result of the supine apprehension test after completion of rehabilitation following a first dislocation as a possible predictor of high risk for redislocation. We extend the follow-up of a previous cohort of patients with first-time shoulder dislocations to better assess this test.

METHODS

Fifty-three men aged 17 to 27 years who sustained a first traumatic shoulder dislocation were treated by shoulder immobilization for 4 weeks and then rehabilitated with a standard physical therapy protocol. At 6-week follow-up, a supine anterior apprehension test was performed to assess the risk of redislocation. The patients were observed prospectively for a minimum of 75 months.

RESULTS

Of the 53 participants, 52 (mean age, 20.2 years) completed the study follow-up. Of the 52 subjects, 41 (79%) were combat soldiers. Follow-up was between 75 and 112 months. Of the 52 subjects, 31 (60%) redislocated at a range of 3 to 70 months after the initial dislocation. Eleven of 14 subjects (79%; confidence interval, 52%-92%) with a positive anterior apprehension test result redislocated, compared with 20 of 38 patients (53%; confidence interval, 37%-68%) with a negative test result. Patients with a positive test result redislocated more and earlier (P = .02, PROC LIFETEST, SAS).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the supine apprehension test after a first shoulder dislocation and rehabilitation can help predict risk for recurrent instability. It potentially may be included as a variable in decision analysis models.

Interest of emergency arthroscopic stabilization in primary shoulder dislocation in young athletes

INTRODUCTION

The recurrence rate after primary shoulder dislocation in young subjects with high functional demand is close to 75%. The present study assessed the interest of emergency arthroscopic stabilization in this specific population.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A non-randomized prospective study included 31 athletes under 30 years of age with primary anterior shoulder dislocation. Fifteen were offered emergency stabilization; after informed consent, 14 were enrolled in the "emergency stabilization" group. This was compared to a group matched for age, sport and lesion, managed 1 year previously by "non-operative" treatment (n=17), divided into 2 subgroups: "immobilization" and "secondary stabilization". Continuous prospective assessment of recurrence, return to sport and function (QuickDASH, QDsport, Duplay and Rowe scores) enabled comparison between the 3 groups.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 19 months for the "emergency stabilization" group and 25 months for the "non-operative" group. There were no failures in the "emergency stabilization" group, compared to a 77% rate in the "non-operative" group with onset at a mean 7.5 months and a mean 2.6 episodes of recurrence. Seven (54%) of the failures of non-operative treatment required secondary stabilization. Ninety-three percent of the "emergency stabilization" group, 44% of the "immobilization" group and 71% of the "secondary stabilization" group resumed sport at least at their pre-dislocation level. Mean Quick DASH was 1.46 in the "emergency stabilization" group, versus 15.28 the "immobilization" group (P<0.05) and 16.96 in the "secondary stabilization" group. Mean Duplay and Rowe scores were respectively 92.9 and 95 in the "emergency stabilization" group, versus 59.44 and 61.1 in the "immobilization" group (P<0.05) and 85 and 93.57 in the "secondary stabilization" group.

DISCUSSION

Emergency arthroscopic stabilization limits recurrence (Kirkley et al.), with better functional results than for secondary stabilization, lesion "freshness" providing a more favorable environment for labral and ligamentary healing. These encouraging results need confirmation over longer follow-up.

Recurrent anterior shoulder instability: Review of the literature and current concepts

The purpose of this review article is to discuss the clinical spectrum of recurrent traumatic anterior shoulder instability with the current concepts and controversies at the scientific level. Because of increasing participation of people from any age group of the population in sports activities, health care professionals dealing with the care of trauma patients must have a thorough understanding of the anatomy, patho-physiology, risk factors, and management of anterior shoulder instability. The risk factors for recurrent shoulder dislocation are young age, participation in high demand contact sports activities, presence of Hill-Sachs or osseous Bankart lesion, previous history of ipsilateral traumatic dislocation, ipsilateral rotator cuff or deltoid muscle insufficiency, and underlying ligamentous laxity. Achieving the best result for any particular patient depends on the procedure that allows observation of the joint surfaces, provides the anatomical repair, maintains range of motion, and also can be applied with low rates of complications and recurrence. Although various surgical techniques have been described, a consensus does not exist and thus, orthopedic surgeons should follow and try to improve the current evidence-based treatment modalities for the patients.

External rotation immobilization for primary shoulder dislocation: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The traditional treatment for primary anterior shoulder dislocations has been immobilization in a sling with the arm in a position of adduction and internal rotation. However, recent basic science and clinical data have suggested recurrent instability may be reduced with immobilization in external rotation after primary shoulder dislocation.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We performed a randomized controlled trial to compare the (1) frequency of recurrent instability and (2) disease-specific quality-of-life scores after treatment of first-time shoulder dislocation using either immobilization in external rotation or immobilization in internal rotation in a group of young patients.

METHODS

Sixty patients younger than 35 years of age with primary, traumatic, anterior shoulder dislocations were randomized (concealed, computer-generated) to immobilization with either an internal rotation sling (n = 29) or an external rotation brace (n = 31) at a mean of 4 days after closed reduction (range, 1-7 days). Patients with large bony lesions or polytrauma were excluded. The two groups were similar at baseline. Both groups were immobilized for 4 weeks with identical therapy protocols thereafter. Blinded assessments were completed by independent observers for a minimum of 12 months (mean, 25 months; range, 12-43 months). Recurrent instability was defined as a second documented anterior dislocation or multiple episodes of shoulder subluxation severe enough for the patient to request surgical stabilization. Validated disease-specific quality-of-life data (Western Ontario Shoulder Instability index [WOSI], American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons evaluation [ASES]) were also collected. Ten patients (17%, five from each group) were lost to followup. Reported compliance with immobilization in both groups was excellent (80%).

RESULTS

With the numbers available, there was no difference in the rate of recurrent instability between groups: 10 of 27 patients (37%) with the external rotation brace versus 10 of 25 patients (40%) with the sling redislocated or developed symptomatic recurrent instability (p = 0.41). WOSI scores were not different between groups (p = 0.74) and, although the difference in ASES scores approached statistical significance (p = 0.05), the magnitude of this difference was small and of uncertain clinical importance.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite previous published findings, our results show immobilization in external rotation did not confer a significant benefit versus sling immobilization in the prevention of recurrent instability after primary anterior shoulder dislocation. Further studies with larger numbers may elucidate whether functional outcomes, compliance, or comfort with immobilization can be improved with this device.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

How does external rotation bracing influence motion and functional scores after arthroscopic shoulder stabilization?

BACKGROUND

After arthroscopic shoulder stabilization, the loss of motion or delayed recovery of motion remains a clinical problem and may lead to poor patient satisfaction. There remains no consensus regarding the optimal position for postoperative immobilization and it is not known whether the position for shoulder immobilization has an effect on motion and functional recovery.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We asked: (1) Do patients treated with external rotation (ER) bracing after arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization reliably regain ROM and shoulder function? And (2) what is the frequency of recurrent instability and brace-related complications associated with the use of ER bracing?

METHODS

Forty consecutive patients with a primary diagnosis of anterior shoulder instability underwent arthroscopic stabilization and received postoperative ER bracing; 33 patients (83%; mean age, 23 years; range, 13-44 years) were followed for at least 1 year postoperatively and seven patients were lost to followup. Shoulder ROM and functional scores were recorded preoperatively and at 2 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, and greater than 1 year (mean, 16 months) after surgery.

RESULTS

All patients recovered their preoperative ROM and most patients achieved normal ROM by 3 months after surgery. Significant improvements in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) scores were observed at each postoperative time point. The mean (± SD) final scores were 95 ± 9 for the ASES and 87% ± 17% for the WOSI (p < 0.001 compared to preoperative scores). One patient (3%) developed recurrent instability. No patients underwent reoperation for the injured shoulder for any reason during the followup period.

CONCLUSIONS

ER bracing after arthroscopic shoulder stabilization is associated with a predictable recovery of ROM and functional score improvement. Future studies comparing ER bracing to traditional sling use should be conducted to determine the optimal method of postoperative immobilization.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Nonoperative and postoperative rehabilitation for glenohumeral instability

The glenohumeral joint is an inherently unstable joint that relies on the interaction of the dynamic and static stabilizers to maintain stability. Disruption of this interplay or poor development of any of these factors may result in instability, pain, and a loss of function. Rehabilitation will vary based on the type of instability present and the key principles described. Whether a course of nonoperative rehabilitation is followed or the patient presents postoperatively, a comprehensive program designed to establish full ROM and balance capsular mobility, in addition to maximizing muscular strength, endurance, proprioception, dynamic stability, and neuromuscular control is essential. A functional approach to rehabilitation using movement patterns and sport-specific positions along with an interval sport program will allow a gradual return to athletics. The focus of the program should minimize the risk of recurrence and ensure that the patient can safely return to functional activities.

In-game Management of Common Joint Dislocations

Context:

Sideline management of sports-related joint dislocations often places the treating medical professional in a challenging position. These injuries frequently require prompt evaluation, diagnosis, reduction, and postreduction management before they can be evaluated at a medical facility. Our objective is to review the mechanism, evaluation, reduction, and postreduction management of sports-related dislocations to the shoulder, elbow, finger, knee, patella, and ankle joints.

Evidence Acquisition:

A literature review was performed using the PubMed database to evaluate previous and current publications focused on joint dislocations. This review focused on articles published between 1980 and 2013.

Study Design:

Clinical review.

Level of Evidence:

Level 4.

Results:

The clinician should weigh the benefits and risks of on-field reduction based on their knowledge of the injury and the presence of associated injuries.

Conclusion:

When properly evaluated and diagnosed, most sports-related dislocations can be reduced and initially managed at the game.

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

BACKGROUND

Acute anterior dislocation, which is the most common type of shoulder dislocation, usually results from an injury. Subsequently, the shoulder is less stable and is more susceptible to re-dislocation, especially in active young adults. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2006.

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 (September 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1946 to September 2013), EMBASE (1980 to Week 38, 2013), CINAHL (1982 to September 2013), PEDro (1929 to November 2012), OTseeker (inception to November 2012) and trial registries. We also searched conference proceedings and reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing various conservative interventions versus control (no or sham treatment) or other conservative interventions applied after closed reduction of traumatic anterior dislocation of the shoulder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. Results of comparable groups of trials were pooled.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three randomised trials and one quasi-randomised trial, which involved 470 participants (371 male) with primary traumatic anterior dislocation of the shoulder reduced by various closed methods. Three studies evaluated mixed populations; in the fourth study, all participants were male and 80% were soldiers. All trials were at some risk of bias but to a differing extent. One was at high risk in all domains of the risk of bias tool, and one was at unclear or high risk in all domains; the other two trials were deemed to have predominantly low risk across all domains. Overall, reflecting both the risk of bias and the imprecision of findings, we judged the quality of evidence to be "very low" for all outcomes, meaning that we are very uncertain about the estimates of effect.The four trials evaluated the same comparison - immobilisation in external rotation versus internal rotation - and each of our three primary outcomes (re-dislocation, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for shoulder instability and resumption of activities) was reported by one or more of the trials, with two-year or longer follow-up. Pooling was possible for "re-dislocation" (three trials) and for aspects of "resumption of sport/activities at pre-injury level" (two trials).There was no evidence to show a difference between the two groups in re-dislocation at two-year or longer follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.06 favouring internal rotation, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 1.54; P value 0.77; 252 participants; three trials). In a low-risk population, with an illustrative baseline risk of 247 re-dislocations per 1000, these data equate to 15 more (95% CI 67 fewer to 133 more) re-dislocations per 1000 after immobilisation in external rotation. In a medium-risk population, with an illustrative baseline risk of 436 re-dislocations per 1000, the data equate to 26 more (95% CI 118 fewer to 235 more) re-dislocations after immobilisation in external rotation.Nor was evidence found to show a difference between the two groups in return to pre-injury levels of activity at two-year or longer follow-up (RR 1.25 favouring external rotation, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.2; P value 0.43; 278 participants; two trials). In a low-risk population, with an illustrative baseline risk of 204 participants per 1000 returning to pre-injury levels of activity, this equates to 41 more (95% CI 59 fewer to 245 more) participants per 1000 resuming activity after immobilisation in external rotation. In a high-risk population, with an illustrative baseline risk of 605 participants per 1000 returning to pre-injury levels of activity, this equates to 161 more (95% CI 76 fewer to 395 more) participants per 1000 resuming activity after immobilisation in external rotation.One trial reported that the difference between the two groups in Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index scores, analysed using non-parametric statistics, was "not significant (P = 0.32)". Of our secondary outcomes, pooling was possible for "any instability" (two trials) and for important adverse events (three events, two trials). However, adverse event data were collected only in an ad hoc way, and it is unclear whether identification and reporting of such events was comprehensive. No report addressed participant satisfaction or health-related quality of life outcome measures.There was no evidence confirming a difference between the two positions of immobilisation in any of the primary or secondary outcomes; for each outcome, the confidence intervals were wide, covering the possibility of substantial benefit for each intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Numerous conservative strategies may be adopted after closed reduction of a traumatic anterior dislocation of the shoulder, and many warrant investigation. However, our review reveals that evidence from randomised controlled trials is only available for a single approach: immobilisation in external rotation versus immobilisation in the traditional position of internal rotation. Moreover, this evidence is insufficient to demonstrate whether immobilisation in external rotation confers any benefit over immobilisation in internal rotation.We identified six unpublished trials and two ongoing trials that compare immobilisation in external versus internal rotation. Given this, the main priority for research on this question consists of the publication of completed trials, and the completion and publication of ongoing trials. Meanwhile, increased attention to other interventions is required. Sufficiently powered, good quality, well reported randomised controlled trials with long-term surveillance should be conducted to examine the optimum duration of immobilisation, whether immobilisation is necessary at all (in older age groups particularly), which rehabilitative interventions work best and the acceptability to participants of different care strategies.

Do nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs affect the outcome of arthroscopic Bankart repair?

To achieve pain control after arthroscopic shoulder surgery, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are a complement to other analgesics. However, experimental studies have raised concerns that these drugs may have a detrimental effect on soft tissue-to-bone healing and, thus, have a negative effect on the outcome. We wanted to investigate if there are any differences in the clinical outcome after the arthroscopic Bankart procedure for patients who received NSAIDs prescription compared with those who did not. 477 patients with a primary arthroscopic Bankart procedure were identified in the Norwegian shoulder instability register and included in the study. 32.5% received prescription of NSAIDs post-operatively. 370 (78%) of the patients answered a follow-up questionnaire containing the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability index (WOSI). Mean follow-up was 21 months. WOSI at follow-up were 75% in the NSAID group and 74% in the control group. 12% of the patients in the NSAID group and 14% in the control group reported recurrence of instability. The reoperation rate was 5% in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups. Prescription of short-term post-operative NSAID treatment in the post-operative period did not influence on the functional outcome after arthroscopic Bankart procedures.

Management of primary acute anterior shoulder dislocation: systematic review and quantitative synthesis of the literature

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of surgical versus conservative treatment of primary acute anterior dislocation of the shoulder.

METHODS

A systematic review of published studies on the treatment of primary acute anterior dislocation of the shoulder was performed. Three investigators independently conducted the research. A comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases using various combinations of the keywords "shoulder," "dislocation," "treatment," "acute," and "primary" over the years 1994 to 2013 was performed. The following data were extracted: demographics, soft tissue lesions and bone defects, outcome measurements, type of management, recurrence of instability, and complications. A quantitative synthesis of the literature was performed to compare surgery and conservative management and immobilization by internal and external in patients undergoing conservative treatment.

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies were included in which 2,813 shoulders were evaluated. All patients sustained primary acute anterior shoulder dislocation. The mean Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) was 67 points (range, 19 to 84). Pooled results from comparative studies showed that the rate of recurrence was statistically significantly lower in the surgical group than in the conservative group (odds ratio, 12.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.88 to 33.10; P < .00001). External rotation immobilization provided better results than internal rotation, being associated with a lower rate of recurrence (odds ratio, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.34 to 3.87; P = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Although limited, the available evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTS) supports primary surgery in young adults engaged in highly demanding sports or job activities. There is lack of evidence to determine whether surgical or nonsurgical treatment is better for other categories of injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I to IV studies.

Immobilization in internal or external rotation does not change recurrence rates after traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to systematically review and quantitatively synthesize the data on recurrence rates after shoulder immobilization in internal versus external rotation in first-time, traumatic shoulder dislocations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the keywords "(((external rotation) OR internal rotation) AND immobilization) AND shoulder" in the online databases PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and the Cochrane Library. Random-effects models were used to calculate the cumulatively pooled risk ratios (RRs) of recurrent shoulder dislocations. All analyses were also stratified by age.

RESULTS

We included 5 studies with a total of 471 patients (230 internal rotation and 241 external rotation) published between 2001 and 2011 in English. The pooled random-effects RR for recurrence of shoulder dislocations at all ages was 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-1.27; P = .278). The RR was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.38 to 1.29; P = .250) for patients aged 30 years or younger and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.32 to 1.88; P = .579) for those aged older than 30 years.

CONCLUSION

The current best evidence does not support a relative effectiveness of immobilization in external rotation compared with internal rotation to avoid recurrent shoulder dislocations in patients with traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations.

Evaluation of immobilization in external rotation after primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: 5-year results

BACKGROUND

It is still not clear which method is the most efficient for treating primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation. Immobilization in external rotation has become increasingly discussed within the last 10 years. The aim of this study was to evaluate the rate of recurrence and clinical outcome of the immobilization in external rotation after primary traumatic anterior dislocation within a midterm period of 5 years. Additionally, a summary of literature is given according to the present knowledge of this issue.

METHODS

From May 2004 to May 2006, 28 patients with primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations were included in a prospective MRI-controlled study. After a follow-up of 5 years, the recurrence rate and clinical outcomes of the patients were evaluated using clinical scores (Constant and Murley score, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, Rowe score).

RESULTS

After 5 years, 26 patients (93 %; males, n = 25; female, n = 1; mean age, 29.3 years) were interviewed concerning re-dislocations. In the meantime, four patients (15 %) experienced a re-dislocation (ø 12.2 months) after the end of the immobilization. Overall, 21 patients (75 %) were included in a clinical follow-up (CM score: ø 92.8 points; Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index: ø 87 %; Rowe score (in 17 patients): ø 94.2 points). Upon clinical examination, unidirectional anterior instability was found in one patient, which corresponds to an overall instability rate of 19 % within the examined patient population including the re-dislocations.

CONCLUSIONS

Immobilization in external rotation shows satisfactory results after 5 years in regard to recurrence and instability rates and clinical outcomes. The data show that with immobilization in external rotation, re-dislocations occur within the first 2 years.

Is protecting the healing ligament beneficial after immobilization in external rotation for an initial shoulder dislocation?

BACKGROUND

Immobilization in external rotation is one of the treatment options for an initial dislocation of the shoulder. However, it remains unclear how long it takes for a Bankart lesion to heal.

HYPOTHESIS

Protection of a healing Bankart lesion from stretching would promote the healing process and decrease the recurrence rate after an initial dislocation of the shoulder.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, prospective randomized study. Between January 2005 and August 2009, 109 patients (71 male and 38 female; mean age, 30 years) with an initial traumatic dislocation of the shoulder were enrolled. After 3 weeks of immobilization in external rotation, a shoulder motion restriction band designed to avoid stretching the anteroinferior shoulder capsule was used for 0 weeks (36 patients), 3 weeks (37 patients), or 6 weeks (36 patients). After using the band, patients were allowed to use their shoulders freely, but they were advised to avoid vigorous sport activities for at least 3 months after the injury. Any recurrent dislocation and return to sports were assessed at 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Of 109 patients, 90 were followed up for 2 years. The compliance rates were 60% to 72% among the groups (P = .54). The recurrence rate of dislocation was 28% in the 0-week group, 33% in the 3-week group, and 32% in the 6-week group (P = .88) according to the intention-to-treat analysis, and they were a respective 24%, 28%, and 27% according to the per-protocol analysis (P = .95). Based on the sport activity level, the recurrence rates for patients involved in contact sports (7/15, 47%) and those involved in noncontact sports (19/51, 37%) were significantly higher than for those not involved in sport activities (2/24, 8.3%) (P = .0076). Among the 3 groups, there were no significant differences in the recurrence rates. There was no significant difference in the rate of return to sports (P = .39).

CONCLUSION

No difference in the recurrence rate was seen with the use of a shoulder motion restriction band after 3 weeks of immobilization in external rotation after an initial dislocation of the shoulder.

Immobilizing performances, comfort, and user-friendliness of the shoulder abduction-external rotation braces

BACKGROUND

Shoulder external rotation braces used for patients with a first-time shoulder dislocation are designed with a variety of arm positions in abduction as well as external rotation. However, few studies have focused on their immobilizing performance, comfort, or user-friendliness. Especially, there have been no robust data of shoulder abduction-external rotation (A-ER) braces in comparison to those of external rotation (ER) braces.

METHODS

Four types of commercially available shoulder braces (two ER and two A-ER braces) were tested in 30 healthy participants. The angles of external rotation and abduction were measured for each brace at initial application, after simulated daily activities, and after reapplication. Then, subjects were asked to assess the discomfort of bracing and difficulty of reapplication using a visual analogue scale. Data were compared between the two ER braces and two A-ER braces as well as among the four braces.

RESULTS

For both external rotation angle and subjective assessment, there were no significant differences between the ER and A-ER braces. Among the four braces, the measurement of arm position demonstrated no significant differences, except the external rotation angles between the two ER braces. The A-ER braces were assessed to be significantly less comfortable than the ER braces in the subjective assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Immobilization using the A-ER braces could maintain the arm position in abduction-external rotation with comparable user-friendliness, although they tended to be less comfortable during daily activities compared to the ER braces.

Publication of sports medicine-related randomized controlled trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence that a significant proportion of randomized trials in medicine, and recently in orthopaedics, do not go on to publication.

PURPOSE

The objectives of this study were (1) to determine publication rates of randomized controlled trials in sports medicine that have been registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (CTG) and (2) to compare the registration summaries of randomized trials on CTG with final published manuscripts on pertinent methodological variables.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

Two independent investigators searched ClinicalTrials.gov for all closed and completed trials related to sports medicine until June 2009 using a text search strategy. The authors then searched for publications resulting from these registered trials in peer-reviewed journals that are indexed with MEDLINE and/or EMBASE as of February 2012 based on study authors and key words provided in the study protocol. Details of primary outcomes and secondary outcomes, study sponsors, and sample size were extracted and compared between registrations and publications.

RESULTS

Of 34 closed and completed trials registered on CTG, there were 20 resultant publications in peer-reviewed journals (58.8%). There was no significant relationship between source of funding and rate of publication (P > .05). The authors found a discrepancy between the CTG registration summary and the manuscript in at least one methodological variable (primary/secondary outcomes, inclusion/exclusion criteria, sample size) in 16 of 20 (80.0%) articles and a discrepancy in the primary outcome in 8 of 20 (40.0%) published trials.

CONCLUSION

Although registration of sports medicine trials in CTG does not consistently result in publication or disclosure of results at 32 months from the time of study completion, observed publication rates are higher than in other orthopaedic subspecialties. Changes are also frequently made to the final presentation of eligibility criteria and primary and secondary outcomes that are not reflected in the registered trial data.

Management of mid-season traumatic anterior shoulder instability in athletes

Shoulder dislocation and subluxation injuries are common in young athletes and most frequently occur during the competitive season. Controversy exists regarding optimal treatment of an athlete with an in-season shoulder dislocation, and limited data are available to guide treatment. Rehabilitation may facilitate return to sport within 3 weeks, but return is complicated by a moderate risk of recurrence. Bracing may reduce the risk of recurrence, but it restricts motion and may not be tolerated in patients who must complete certain sport-specific tasks such as throwing. Surgical management of shoulder dislocation or subluxation with arthroscopic or open Bankart repair reduces the rate of recurrence; however, the athlete is unable to participate in sport for the remainder of the competitive season. When selecting a management option, the clinician must consider the natural history of shoulder instability, pathologic changes noted on examination and imaging, sport- and position-specific demands, duration of treatment, and the athlete's motivation.