Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (Review)

Kristiansen 1988 (Continued)
Notes Of the 2 excluded participants of the surgical group: 1 died, 1 treatment failure. Of the 4 excluded
participants of the conservative group: 1 died, 2 treatment failures and 1 re-fracture.
Risk of bias
Item Authors’ judgement Description
Allocation concealment? Unclear B - Unclear
Kristiansen 1989
Methods Method of randomisation: unknown
Assessor blinding: yes at 2 year follow up
Loss to follow up at 2 years: 46/85 (18 deaths, 28 non-attenders)
Participants Hvidovre University Hospital, Denmark
85 patients with proximal humeral fractures; 74% minimally displaced (Neer).
60 female, 25 male; median age 72 years (1 week group), 70 years (3 weeks group)
Interventions Interventions started immediately or after closed or open manipulation.
(1) 1 week immobilisation in sling and body bandage
(2) 3 weeks immobilisation in sling and body bandage
Assigned: 42/43
Completed (at 2 years): 18/21
Outcomes Length of follow up: 2 years; also assessed at 1, 3, 6 & 12 months
Overall score (Neer without anatomic section) - median
Mobility - overall Neer score (range of motion: flexion, extension, abduction, internal & external rotation)
Function - overall Neer score (strength, reaching, stability)
Pain - overall Neer score (none to disabling)
Reflex sympathetic dystrophy
Notes Post immobilisation for both groups: instructions given for Codman’s pendulum exercises as well as active
movements of elbow and hand.
Risk of bias
Item Authors’ judgement Description
Allocation concealment? Unclear B - Unclear
Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (Review)
Copyright © 2008 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
23