Literature DB >> 24306123

Current state of treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint injuries in Germany: is there a difference between specialists and non-specialists? A survey of German trauma and orthopaedic departments.

Maurice Balke1, Marco M Schneider, Sven Shafizadeh, Holger Bäthis, Bertil Bouillon, Marc Banerjee.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate currently preferred treatment strategies as well as the acceptance of new arthroscopic techniques among German orthopaedic surgeons. We assumed that surgeons specialized in shoulder surgery and arthroscopy would treat acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations different to non-specialized surgeons.
METHODS: Seven hundred and ninety-six orthopaedic and/or trauma departments were found through the German hospital directory of 2012. Corresponding websites were searched for the email address of the chair of shoulder surgery (if applicable) or the department. Seven hundred forty-six emails with the request for study participation including a link to an online survey of 36 questions were sent. In 60 emails, the recipient was unknown.
RESULTS: Two hundred and three (30 %) surgeons participated in the survey. one hundred and one were members of the AGA (German-speaking Society for Arthroscopy and Joint-Surgery) and/or of the DVSE (German Association of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery) and regarded as specialists, while 102 were non-members and regarded as non-specialists. According to the treatment of Rockwood I/II and IV-VI injuries, no significant differences were found. Seventy-four % of non-specialists and 67 % of specialists preferred surgical treatment for Rockwood III injuries (P = 0.046). Non-specialists would use the hook plate in 56 % followed by the TightRope in 16 %; specialists would use the TightRope in 38 % followed by the hook plate in 32 % (P = 0.004).
CONCLUSIONS: The majority of German orthopaedic and trauma surgeons advise surgical treatment for Rockwood III injuries. Specialists recommend surgery less often. Non-specialists prefer the hook plate, whereas specialists prefer the arthroscopic TightRope technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Observational survey, Level IV.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24306123     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-013-2795-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  18 in total

1.  [The status of therapy of acromioclavicular joint injury. Results of a survey of trauma surgery clinics in Germany].

Authors:  H Bäthis; M Tingart; B Bouillon; T Tiling
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 1.000

2.  Acute, complete acromioclavicular separation.

Authors:  R J Imatani; J J Hanlon; G W Cady
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1975-04       Impact factor: 5.284

3.  Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint. An end-result study.

Authors:  T N Taft; F C Wilson; J W Oglesby
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Acromioclavicular separations. Closed or open treatment?

Authors:  J A Powers; P J Bach
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1974-10       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  [Conservative or surgical therapy of acromioclavicular joint injury--what is reliable? A systematic analysis of the literature using "evidence-based medicine" criteria].

Authors:  H Bäthis; M Tingart; B Bouillon; T Tiling
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 0.955

6.  Clinical and radiographical results after double flip button stabilization of acute grade III and IV acromioclavicular joint separations.

Authors:  Michael C Glanzmann; Stefan Buchmann; Laurent Audigé; Christoph Kolling; Matthias Flury
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.067

7.  Arthroscopically assisted stabilization of acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint separations.

Authors:  Markus Scheibel; Silvia Dröschel; Christian Gerhardt; Natascha Kraus
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2011-03-24       Impact factor: 6.202

8.  [A new minimally invasive arthroscopic technique for reconstruction of the acromioclavicular joint].

Authors:  F Elser; B Chernchujit; P Ansah; A B Imhoff
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 1.000

9.  Incidence of associated injuries with acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations types III through V.

Authors:  Thomas Tischer; Gian Max Salzmann; Hosam El-Azab; Stephan Vogt; Andreas B Imhoff
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2008-08-25       Impact factor: 6.202

Review 10.  Current method of treatment of acromioclavicular joint dislocations.

Authors:  J S Cox
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 1.390

View more
  14 in total

1.  Inter- and intraobserver reliability of the Rockwood classification in acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations.

Authors:  M M Schneider; M Balke; P Koenen; M Fröhlich; A Wafaisade; B Bouillon; M Banerjee
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-11-16       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  [Injuries of the acromioclavicular joint: Hook plate versus arthroscopy].

Authors:  G Jensen; A Ellwein; C Voigt; J C Katthagen; H Lill
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 3.  [Therapy of acute acromioclavicular joint instability. Meta-analysis of arthroscopic/minimally invasive versus open procedures].

Authors:  T Helfen; G Siebenbürger; B Ockert; F Haasters
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 1.000

4.  The Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Dislocation of the Acromioclavicular Joint.

Authors:  Frank Martetschläger; Natascha Kraus; Markus Scheibel; Jörg Streich; Arne Venjakob; Dirk Maier
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2019-02-08       Impact factor: 5.594

5.  Low prevalence of relevant associated articular lesions in patients with acute III-VI acromioclavicular joint injuries.

Authors:  Miguel Angel Ruiz Ibán; Juan Sarasquete; Mario Gil de Rozas; Pedro Costa; Juan Daniel Tovío; Eduardo Carpinteiro; Abdul Ilah Hachem; Manuel Perez España; Cristina Asenjo Gismero; Jorge Diaz Heredia; Miguel García Navlet
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2018-08-10       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Sports activity after anatomic acromioclavicular joint stabilisation with flip-button technique.

Authors:  Felix Porschke; Marc Schnetzke; Sara Aytac; Stefan Studier-Fischer; Paul Alfred Gruetzner; Thorsten Guehring
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-08-26       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 7.  [Current aspects and new techniques in dislocation of the shoulder joint].

Authors:  J Abel; M A Zumstein; L Bolliger; M O Schär
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.087

8.  Combined arthroscopically assisted coraco- and acromioclavicular stabilization of acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint separations.

Authors:  Carmen Hann; Natascha Kraus; Marvin Minkus; Nina Maziak; Markus Scheibel
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  Arthroscopy-Assisted All-Suture Coracoclavicular and Acromioclavicular Joint Stabilization in Acute Acromioclavicular Joint Injuries.

Authors:  Amit Joshi; Bibek Basukala; Nagmani Singh; Sanjeeb Rijal; Dhan Bahadur Karki; Rohit Bista; Ishor Pradhan
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2021-04-18

10.  Transarticular fixation by hook plate versus coracoclavicular stabilization by single multistrand titanium cable for acute Rockwood grade-V acromioclavicular joint dislocation: a case-control study.

Authors:  You-Shui Gao; Yue-Lei Zhang; Zi-Sheng Ai; Yu-Qiang Sun; Chang-Qing Zhang; Wei Zhang
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2015-11-19       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.