OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety, efficacy and reliability of FARES (fast, reliable and safe) method with the Eachempati external rotation method for reduction of anterior dislocation of shoulder. METHODS: In a single centre, prospective, randomised clinical trial, conducted in our institution from January 2010 to October 2011, 160 patients with acute anterior dislocation of shoulder (with or without an associated fracture of the greater tuberosity of the humerus) who satisfy the inclusion and exclusion criteria were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomised to receive reduction of dislocation with one of the two methods (FARES and Eachempati method) with 80 patients in each group, according to a table of random numbers. Following successful reduction, the following information was recorded: (i) intensity of pain perceived during reduction by using a visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst pain possible), (ii) time interval between the dislocation and the first attempt of reduction, (iii) time interval between the start of the reduction manoeuvre and completion of the reduction, (iv) number of attempts taken to complete the reduction and (iv) any post-reduction complications. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to baseline characteristics. No post-reduction complications were noted in any of the patients in this study. Successful reduction of shoulder dislocation was achieved with the FARES method in 76 (95%) of 80 patients and with the Eachempati external rotation method in 73 (91.25%) of 80 patients. This difference was not statistically significant (p=0.53, Fisher's exact test). Post-reduction result analysis shows that there was a statistically significant difference between the two methods in favour of the FARES method in terms of speed of reduction, pain felt during reduction and number of attempts taken during reduction. CONCLUSIONS: FARES method, as compared with the Eachempati method, is significantly faster, less painful and less number of attempts required for reduction. As both the methods appeared to be safe and effective compared to the previous traditional techniques, we strongly recommend FARES method as the first-choice method compared to Eachempati method for reduction of acute anterior dislocation of shoulder. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety, efficacy and reliability of FARES (fast, reliable and safe) method with the Eachempati external rotation method for reduction of anterior dislocation of shoulder. METHODS: In a single centre, prospective, randomised clinical trial, conducted in our institution from January 2010 to October 2011, 160 patients with acute anterior dislocation of shoulder (with or without an associated fracture of the greater tuberosity of the humerus) who satisfy the inclusion and exclusion criteria were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomised to receive reduction of dislocation with one of the two methods (FARES and Eachempati method) with 80 patients in each group, according to a table of random numbers. Following successful reduction, the following information was recorded: (i) intensity of pain perceived during reduction by using a visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst pain possible), (ii) time interval between the dislocation and the first attempt of reduction, (iii) time interval between the start of the reduction manoeuvre and completion of the reduction, (iv) number of attempts taken to complete the reduction and (iv) any post-reduction complications. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to baseline characteristics. No post-reduction complications were noted in any of the patients in this study. Successful reduction of shoulder dislocation was achieved with the FARES method in 76 (95%) of 80 patients and with the Eachempati external rotation method in 73 (91.25%) of 80 patients. This difference was not statistically significant (p=0.53, Fisher's exact test). Post-reduction result analysis shows that there was a statistically significant difference between the two methods in favour of the FARES method in terms of speed of reduction, pain felt during reduction and number of attempts taken during reduction. CONCLUSIONS: FARES method, as compared with the Eachempati method, is significantly faster, less painful and less number of attempts required for reduction. As both the methods appeared to be safe and effective compared to the previous traditional techniques, we strongly recommend FARES method as the first-choice method compared to Eachempati method for reduction of acute anterior dislocation of shoulder. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I.
Authors: David N Baden; Martijn H Roetman; Tom Boeije; Floris Roodheuvel; Nieke Mullaart-Jansen; Suzanne Peeters; Mike D Burg Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-07-20 Impact factor: 2.692