.jpg)
HAND & WRIST
Better quality literature on scaphoid fracture needed to determine best form of management
This report has been verified
by one or more authors of the
original publication.
Hand (N Y). 2010 Dec;5(4):345-53. doi: 10.1007/s11552-010-9276-6. Epub 2010 Jun 4
59 articles examining the efficacy and risks associated with nonoperative and operative management of acute scaphoid fracture were reviewed to summarize the evidence pertaining to operative and conservative management of the condition. This process analyzed 4 level 1 studies that revealed no significant differences between groups when comparing nonunion, time to union (insufficient data for meta-analysis) and complications (insufficient data for meta-analysis). This meta-analysis and systematic review demonstrated that the current literature on the treatment of acute scaphoid fractures is of poor quality and is limited by flaws such as inconsistent definitions for union.
Unlock the full ACE Report
You have access to {0} free articles per month.Click below to unlock and view this {1}
Unlock NowCritical appraisals of the latest, high-impact randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in orthopaedics
Access to OrthoEvidence podcast content, including collaborations with the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviews with internationally recognized surgeons, and roundtable discussions on orthopaedic news and topics
Subscription to The Pulse, a twice-weekly evidence-based newsletter designed to help you make better clinical decisions
Exclusive access to original content articles, including in-house systematic reviews, and articles on health research methods and hot orthopaedic topics
Or upgrade today and gain access to all OrthoEvidence content for just $1.99 per week.
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to "The Pulse"
Evidence-Based Orthopaedics direct to your inbox.
{0} of {1} free articles
Become an OrthoEvidence Premium Member. Expand your perspective with high-quality evidence.
Upgrade Now
