Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 107-B, Issue 1 | Pages 19 - 26
1 Jan 2025
Bennett J Patel N Nantha-Kumar N Phillips V Nayar SK Kang N

Aims. Frozen shoulder is a common and debilitating condition characterized by pain and restricted movement at the glenohumeral joint. Various treatment methods have been explored to alleviate symptoms, with suprascapular nerve block (SSNB) emerging as a promising intervention. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the effectiveness of SSNB in treating frozen shoulder. Methods. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023475851). We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases in November 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SSNB against other interventions were included. The primary outcome was any functional patient-reported outcome measure. Secondary outcomes were the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, range of motion (ROM), and complications. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias v. 2.0 tool. Results. A total of 12 RCTs were identified (702 patients; mean age 55 years (30 to 72)). Eight RCTs were deemed “low” risk-of-bias and four raised “some concerns”. Comparator interventions included intra-articular steroid injection (IAI), hydrodistension, physiotherapy, and placebo injection with 0.9% saline. Seven studies compared SSNB to IAI, with SSNB resulting in greater improvement in the Shoulder and Pain Disability Index (mean difference -4.75 (95% CI -8.11 to -1.39); p = 0.006) and external rotation (mean difference 11.64 (95% CI -0.05 to 23.33); p = 0.050). In three studies, SSNB demonstrated better VAS (mean difference -0.31 (95% CI -0.53 to 1.79); p = 0.004) compared to physiotherapy (with or without placebo injection). One study favoured hydrodistension over SSNB in improving ROM and VAS. There was no significant difference in outcomes between SSNB administered under ultrasound guidance or using a landmark technique. Conclusion. SSNB can be administered in the outpatient clinic with promising outcomes compared to IAI or physiotherapy based on level I evidence. It can therefore be considered as a first-line treatment option. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2025;107-B(1):19–26


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 8 | Pages 981 - 996
1 Aug 2020
Yang Y Zhao H Chai Y Zhao D Duan L Wang H Zhu J Yang S Li C Chen S Chae S Song J Wang X Yu X

Aims

Whether to perform hybrid surgery (HS) in contrast to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) when treating patients with multilevel cervical disc degeneration remains a controversial subject. To resolve this we have undertaken a meta-analysis comparing the outcomes from HS with ACDF in this condition.

Methods

Seven databases were searched for studies of HS and ACDF from inception of the study to 1 September 2019. Both random-effects and fixed-effects models were used to evaluate the overall effect of the C2-C7 range of motion (ROM), ROM of superior/inferior adjacent levels, adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), heterotopic ossification (HO), complications, neck disability index (NDI) score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, Odom’s criteria, blood loss, and operating and hospitalization time. To obtain more credible results contour-enhanced funnel plots, Egger’s and Begg’s tests, meta-regression, and sensitivity analyses were performed.