SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eurasian Journal of Emergency Medicine / 2018 / Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 1

Implementation of Quebec Shoulder Dislocation Rule in Turkish Patient Population

Murat DAŞ
Aytun TEMİZ
Pages
18–21
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the Quebec rule were detected as 100%, 33.51%, 33.87%, and 98.41%, respectively.Conclusion: Our study suggests that QSDR is a useful decision tool to estimate which patient has fracture dislocation of the shoulder in Turkish population.We think that if a shoulder dislocation patient is “Quebec–,” pre-reduction X-ray could be safely omitted.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the Quebec Shoulder Dislocation Rule (QSDR) is valid in Turkish patient population.Materials and Methods: Adult patients with an anterior shoulder dislocation were enrolled in this study.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Patients with fracture dislocation were classified as “case” group (group 1) and patients with isolated dislocation were included to the “control” group (group 2).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the Quebec rule were detected as 100%, 33.51%, 33.87%, and 98.41%, respectively.Conclusion: Our study suggests that QSDR is a useful decision tool to estimate which patient has fracture dislocation of the shoulder in Turkish population.We think that if a shoulder dislocation patient is “Quebec–,” pre-reduction X-ray could be safely omitted.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the Quebec Shoulder Dislocation Rule (QSDR) is valid in Turkish patient population.Materials and Methods: Adult patients with an anterior shoulder dislocation were enrolled in this study. Patients with a severe head injury, multiple trauma, and drug or alcohol intoxication were excluded. All patients were classified according to the associated fracture status. Patients with fracture dislocation were classified as “case” group (group 1) and patients with isolated dislocation were included to the “control” group (group 2). Group 1 and 2 patients were statistically compared in terms of risk factors defined by QSDR. Diagnostic performance of this decision tool in predicting a clinically significant fracture was studied. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated.Results: A total of 248 patients were included in the study. Fracture dislocation was detected in 63 (25.40%) patients (group 1), and no complicated dislocation was detected in 185 (74.59%) patients (group 2). Statistically significant difference was found between groups 1 and 2 in terms of risk factors defined by the QSDR. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the Quebec rule were detected as 100%, 33.51%, 33.87%, and 98.41%, respectively.Conclusion: Our study suggests that QSDR is a useful decision tool to estimate which patient has fracture dislocation of the shoulder in Turkish population.We think that if a shoulder dislocation patient is “Quebec–,” pre-reduction X-ray could be safely omitted.

🔖

Cite This Article

DAŞ, M., TEMİZ, A. (2022). Implementation of Quebec Shoulder Dislocation Rule in Turkish Patient Population. Eurasian Journal of Emergency Medicine, Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 1, 18–21. https://ajindex.com/articles/508069

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (2)

  1. Berkovitch Y, Shapire J, Haddad M, Keren Y, Rosenberg N. Current clinical trends in first time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation. Merit Res J Med Sci. 2013; 1: 7-13.
  2. Davy AR, Steve JD. Management of shoulder dislocation-are we do-ing enough to reduce the risk of recurrence? Injury. 2002; 33: 775-9. [CrossRef ] Ceroni D, Sadri H, A Leuenberger. Radiographic evaluation of ante-rior dislocation of the shoulder. Acta Radiologica. 2000; 41: 658-61. [CrossRef ] Cunningham NJ. Techniques for reduction of anteroinferior shoulder dis-location. Emerg Med Australia. 2005; 17: 463-71. [CrossRef] Emond M, Le Sage N, Lavoie A, Rochette L. Clinical factors predicting fractures associated with an anterior shoulder dislocation. Acad Emerg. Med 2004; 11: 853-8. [CrossRef] Hendey GW. Necessity of radiographs in the emergency department management of shoulder dislocation. Ann Emerg Med. 2000; 36: 108-13. [CrossRef] Shuster M, Abu-Laban R, Boyd J. Prereduction radiographs in clinically evident anterior shoulder dislocation. Am J Emer Med. 1999; 17: 653-8. [CrossRef] Bonz J, Tinloy B. Emergency department evaluation and treatment of the shoulder and humerus. Emerg Med Clin N Am. 2015; 33: 297-310. [CrossRef] Shuster M, Abu-Laban R, Boyd J, Gauthier C, Shepherd L, Turner C. Pro-spective evaluation of a guideline for the selective elimination of pre-re-duction radiographs in clinically obvious anterior shoulder dislocation. Can J Emerg Med. 2002; 4: 257-62. [CrossRef] Emond M, Le Sage N, Lavoie A, Moore L. Refinement of the Quebec decision rule for radiography in shoulder dislocation. CJEM. 2009; 11: 36-43. [CrossRef] Orloski J, Eskin B, Allegra P, Allegra JR. Do all patients with shoulder dis-location need prereduction x-rays? Am J Emerg Med. 2011; 29: 609-12. [CrossRef]