围绕髋部骨折治疗的争议;临床证据与国家登记趋势。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS HIP International Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-14 DOI:10.1177/11207000231177642
Peter P Schmitz, Matthijs P Somford, Simon S Jameson, B Willem Schreurs, Job L C van Susante
{"title":"围绕髋部骨折治疗的争议;临床证据与国家登记趋势。","authors":"Peter P Schmitz, Matthijs P Somford, Simon S Jameson, B Willem Schreurs, Job L C van Susante","doi":"10.1177/11207000231177642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Several controversies in the optimal treatment of femoral neck fractures persist, together with large variations in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A narrative literature review covering 4 current controversies in the surgical management of femoral neck fractures (total hip arthroplasty (THA) versus hemiarthroplasty (HA), cemented versus uncemented HA, internal fixation versus arthroplasty, operative versus non-operative) was performed. Available literature was balanced against annual trends in the management of femoral neck fractures from the public domain of several national registries (Sweden, Norway, The Netherlands, Australia and New Zealand).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For most controversies, the literature provides stronger evidence than is reflected by variations encountered in daily practice. Implementation of clinical evidence tends to lag behind and important differences exist between countries.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Trends of clinical practice from national registries indicate that implementation of available clinical evidence needs to be improved.</p>","PeriodicalId":12911,"journal":{"name":"HIP International","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Controversies around hip fracture treatment: clinical evidence versus trends from national registries.\",\"authors\":\"Peter P Schmitz, Matthijs P Somford, Simon S Jameson, B Willem Schreurs, Job L C van Susante\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/11207000231177642\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Several controversies in the optimal treatment of femoral neck fractures persist, together with large variations in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A narrative literature review covering 4 current controversies in the surgical management of femoral neck fractures (total hip arthroplasty (THA) versus hemiarthroplasty (HA), cemented versus uncemented HA, internal fixation versus arthroplasty, operative versus non-operative) was performed. Available literature was balanced against annual trends in the management of femoral neck fractures from the public domain of several national registries (Sweden, Norway, The Netherlands, Australia and New Zealand).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For most controversies, the literature provides stronger evidence than is reflected by variations encountered in daily practice. Implementation of clinical evidence tends to lag behind and important differences exist between countries.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Trends of clinical practice from national registries indicate that implementation of available clinical evidence needs to be improved.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12911,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HIP International\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HIP International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/11207000231177642\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/6/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HIP International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11207000231177642","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:股骨颈骨折的最佳治疗方法仍存在一些争议,临床实践中也存在很大差异:方法:我们对目前股骨颈骨折手术治疗中的四种争议(全髋关节置换术(THA)与半髋关节置换术(HA)、骨水泥置换术与非骨水泥置换术、内固定术与关节置换术、手术治疗与非手术治疗)进行了叙述性文献综述。现有文献与几个国家(瑞典、挪威、荷兰、澳大利亚和新西兰)登记处公开的股骨颈骨折治疗年度趋势进行了对比:结果:对于大多数争议,文献提供的证据比日常实践中遇到的变化所反映的证据更有力。临床证据的实施往往滞后,而且各国之间存在重大差异:结论:各国登记的临床实践趋势表明,现有临床证据的实施情况有待改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Controversies around hip fracture treatment: clinical evidence versus trends from national registries.

Purpose: Several controversies in the optimal treatment of femoral neck fractures persist, together with large variations in clinical practice.

Methods: A narrative literature review covering 4 current controversies in the surgical management of femoral neck fractures (total hip arthroplasty (THA) versus hemiarthroplasty (HA), cemented versus uncemented HA, internal fixation versus arthroplasty, operative versus non-operative) was performed. Available literature was balanced against annual trends in the management of femoral neck fractures from the public domain of several national registries (Sweden, Norway, The Netherlands, Australia and New Zealand).

Results: For most controversies, the literature provides stronger evidence than is reflected by variations encountered in daily practice. Implementation of clinical evidence tends to lag behind and important differences exist between countries.

Conclusions: Trends of clinical practice from national registries indicate that implementation of available clinical evidence needs to be improved.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
HIP International
HIP International 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
70
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: HIP International is the official journal of the European Hip Society. It is the only international, peer-reviewed, bi-monthly journal dedicated to diseases of the hip. HIP International considers contributions relating to hip surgery, traumatology of the hip, prosthetic surgery, biomechanics, and basic sciences relating to the hip. HIP International invites reviews from leading specialists with the aim of informing its readers of current evidence-based best practice. The journal also publishes supplements containing proceedings of symposia, special meetings or articles of special educational merit. HIP International is divided into six independent sections led by editors of the highest scientific merit. These sections are: • Biomaterials • Biomechanics • Conservative Hip Surgery • Paediatrics • Primary and Revision Hip Arthroplasty • Traumatology
期刊最新文献
The push-through total femoral prosthesis for revision of a total hip or knee replacement with extreme bone loss. Assessment of radiological and functional outcomes of complex acetabulum fracture managed with combined anterior and posterior approach in a single anaesthetic setting: a retrospective study. The L1 spino-pelvic (L1SP) angle: a simplified approach for the assessment of the PI-LL mismatch in hip surgery. The management of anticoagulated fragility femoral fracture patients. Patient-reported outcomes in total hip arthroplasty for patients with anatomically contoured femoral heads.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1