To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Minimal benefit of reverse shoulder arthroplasty vs. conservative treatment for 3- or 4-part PHFs

Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
January 2020

Minimal benefit of reverse shoulder arthroplasty vs. conservative treatment for 3- or 4-part PHFs

Vol: 9| Issue: 1| Number:26| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:1

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty versus nonoperative treatment for 3- or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial

J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2019 Dec;28(12):2259-2271.

Contributing Authors:
Y Lopiz B Alcobia-Diaz M Galan-Olleros Garcia-Fern C ez AL Picado F Marco

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

Sixty-two patients aged 80 years or older with a 3- or 4-part displaced proximal humerus fracture were randomized to receive a reverse shoulder arthroplasty or conservative treatment with a sling. The primary outcome of interest was the Constant score at 12 months post-operation. Secondary outcomes of interest included the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, the Short-Form 12 (S...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue