Literature DB >> 22258973

Manipulative interventions for reducing pulled elbow in young children.

Marjolein Krul1, Johannes C van der Wouden, Lisette W A van Suijlekom-Smit, Bart W Koes.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pulled elbow (nursemaid's elbow) is a common injury in young children. It results from a sudden pull on the arm, usually by an adult or taller person, which pulls the radius through the annular ligament, resulting in subluxation (partial dislocation) of the radial head. The child experiences sudden acute pain and loss of function in the affected arm. Pulled elbow is usually treated by manual reduction of the subluxed radial head. Various manoeuvres can be applied. Most textbooks recommend supination of the forearm, as opposed to pronation and other approaches. It is unclear which manoeuvre is most successful. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2009.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review is to compare the effectiveness and painfulness of the different methods used to manipulate pulled elbow in young children. SEARCH
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, PEDro, clinical trial registers and reference lists of articles. Date of last search: July 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Any randomised or quasi-randomised controlled clinical trials evaluating manipulative interventions for pulled elbow were included. Our primary outcome was failure at the first attempt, necessitating further treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently evaluated trials for inclusion and, for the included trials, independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. MAIN
RESULTS: One trial with 66 children was newly included in this update. Overall, four trials with 379 children, all younger than seven years old, were included. All four trials compared pronation versus supination. One trial was at high risk of selection bias because allocation was not concealed and all four trials were at high risk of detection bias due to the lack of assessor blinding. Pronation resulted in statistically significantly less failure than supination (21/177 versus 47/181, risk ratio 0.45; 95% confidence interval 0.28 to 0.73). Pain perception was reported by two trials but data were unavailable for pooling. Both studies concluded that the pronation technique was less painful than the supination technique. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence from four small low-quality trials that the pronation method might be more effective and less painful than the supination method for manipulating pulled elbow in young children. We recommend that a high quality randomised trial be performed to strengthen the evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22258973      PMCID: PMC6464868          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007759.pub3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  19 in total

Review 1.  Reduction of pulled elbows.

Authors:  David Lewis; Jon Argall
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 2.740

2.  Subluxation of the head of the radius in young children.

Authors:  M E GRIFFIN
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1955-01       Impact factor: 7.124

3.  Pulled elbow.

Authors:  H K MAGILL; A P AITKEN
Journal:  Surg Gynecol Obstet       Date:  1954-06

4.  Pulled elbow: a study of 100 patients.

Authors:  C M Illingworth
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1975-06-21

5.  Emergency department visits for nursemaid's elbow in the United States, 2005-2006.

Authors:  David Brown
Journal:  Orthop Nurs       Date:  2009 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 0.913

6.  The treatment of pulled elbow: a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  A M Taha
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 3.067

7.  Radial head subluxation: comparing two methods of reduction.

Authors:  J McDonald; C Whitelaw; L J Goldsmith
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 3.451

8.  History and radiographic findings associated with clinically suspected radial head subluxations.

Authors:  C G Macias; R Wiebe; J Bothner
Journal:  Pediatr Emerg Care       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 1.454

9.  Randomized comparison of pain perception during radial head subluxation reduction using supination-flexion or forced pronation.

Authors:  Daniel A Green; Marc Y-R Linares; Barbara M Garcia Peña; Barry Greenberg; Rodney L Baker
Journal:  Pediatr Emerg Care       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 1.454

10.  Pronation versus supination maneuvers for the reduction of 'pulled elbow': a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Doğan Bek; Cemil Yildiz; Ozkan Köse; Ali Sehirlioğlu; Mustafa Başbozkurt
Journal:  Eur J Emerg Med       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 2.799

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Manipulative interventions for reducing pulled elbow in young children.

Authors:  Marjolein Krul; Johannes C van der Wouden; Emma J Kruithof; Lisette Wa van Suijlekom-Smit; Bart W Koes
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-07-28

2.  [ProFI reduction of pediatric pulled elbow].

Authors:  T Ruffing; H Winkler; M Muhm
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 1.000

3.  Reduction of radial-head subluxation in children by triage nurses in the emergency department: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Andrew Dixon; Chantalle Clarkin; Nick Barrowman; Rhonda Correll; Martin H Osmond; Amy C Plint
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2014-03-24       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  Investigation on 2331 cases of pulled elbow over the last 10 years.

Authors:  Takashi Irie; Takashi Sono; Yousuke Hayama; Taiichi Matsumoto; Mutsumi Matsushita
Journal:  Pediatr Rep       Date:  2014-05-06

5.  Annular ligament reconstruction by suture anchor for treatment of radial head dislocation in children.

Authors:  Jian Wang; Liang-Dong Jiang; Ai-Yong He; Dai-Rong Wang; Jun Zhu; Run-Shan Duan; Cheng Tao
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 2.362

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.