scholarly journals Methodological Rigor and Temporal Trends of Cardiovascular Medicine Meta‐Analyses in Highest‐Impact Journals

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (18) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dhruv Mahtta ◽  
Ahmed Altibi ◽  
Mohamed M. Gad ◽  
Amjad Samara ◽  
Amr F. Barakat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
European Heart Journal ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Temporal Trends ◽  
Cardiovascular Medicine ◽  
Cardiovascular Research ◽  
Methodological Rigor ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Over Time

Background Well‐conducted meta‐analyses are considered to be at the top of the evidence‐based hierarchy pyramid, with an expansion of these publications within the cardiovascular research arena. There are limited data evaluating the trends and quality of such publications. The objective of this study was to evaluate the methodological rigor and temporal trends of cardiovascular medicine‐related meta‐analyses published in the highest impact journals. Methods and Results Using the Medline database, we retrieved cardiovascular medicine‐related systematic reviews and meta‐analyses published in The New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, Journal of the American Medical Association, The British Medical Journal, Annals of Internal Medicine, Circulation, European Heart Journal, and Journal of American College of Cardiology between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2018. Among 6406 original investigations published during the study period, meta‐analyses represented 422 (6.6%) articles, with an annual decline in the proportion of published meta‐analyses (8.7% in 2012 versus 4.6% in 2018, P trend =0.002). A substantial number of studies failed to incorporate elements of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses or Meta‐Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines (51.9%) and only a minority of studies (10.4%) were registered in PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews). Fewer manuscripts failed to incorporate the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses or Meta‐Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology elements over time (60.2% in 2012 versus 40.0% in 2018, P trend <0.001) whereas the number of meta‐analyses registered at PROSPERO has increased (2.4% in 2013 versus 17.5% in 2018, P trend <0.001). Conclusions The proportion of cardiovascular medicine‐related meta‐analyses published in the highest impact journals has declined over time. Although there is an increasing trend in compliance with quality‐based guidelines, the overall compliance remains low.

scholarly journals Evidence-Based Medicine, Systematic Reviews, and Guidelines in Interventional Pain Management: Part 6. Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies

2008 ◽  
Vol 5;12 (5;9) ◽  
pp. 819-850
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Confounding Bias ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Based Medicine

Observational studies provide an important source of information when randomized controlled trials (RCTs) cannot or should not be undertaken, provided that the data are analyzed and interpreted with special attention to bias. Evidence-based medicine (EBM) stresses the examination of evidence from clinical research and describes it as a shift in medical paradigm, in contrast to intuition, unsystematic clinical experience, and pathophysiologic rationale. While the importance of randomized trials has been created by the concept of the hierarchy of evidence in guiding therapy, much of the medical research is observational. The reporting of observational research is often not detailed and clear enough with insufficient quality and poor reporting, which hampers the assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the study and the generalizability of the mixed results. Thus, in recent years, progress and innovations in health care are measured by systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A systematic review is defined as, “the application of scientific strategies that limit bias by the systematic assembly, clinical appraisal, and synthesis of all relevant studies on a specific topic.” Meta-analysis usually is the final step in a systematic review. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are labor intensive, requiring expertise in both the subject matter and review methodology, and also must follow the rules of EBM which suggests that a formal set of rules must complement medical training and common sense for clinicians to integrate the results of clinical research effectively. While expertise in the review methods is important, the expertise in the subject matter and technical components is also crucial. Even though, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, specifically of RCTs, have exploded, the quality of the systematic reviews is highly variable and consequently, the opinions reached of the same studies are quite divergent. Numerous deficiencies have been described in methodologic assessment of the quality of the individual articles. Consequently, observational studies can provide an important complementary source of information, provided that the data are analyzed and interpreted in the context of confounding bias to which they are prone. Appropriate systematic reviews of observational studies, in conjunction with RCTs, may provide the basis for elimination of a dangerous discrepancy between the experts and the evidence. Steps in conducting systematic reviews of observational studies include planning, conducting, reporting, and disseminating the results. MOOSE, or Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology, a proposal for reporting contains specifications including background, search strategy, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. Use of the MOOSE checklist should improve the usefulness of meta-analysis for authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and decision-makers. This manuscript describes systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies. Authors frequently utilize RCTs and observational studies in one systematic review; thus, they should also follow the reporting standards of the Quality of Reporting of Meta-analysis (QUOROM) statement, which also provides a checklist. A combined approach of QUOROM and MOOSE will improve reporting of systematic reviews and lead to progress and innovations in health care. Key words: Observational studies, evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, metaanalysis, randomized trials, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, confounding bias, QUOROM, MOOSE

scholarly journals Temporal Trends in Effect Sizes: Causes, Detection, and Implications

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Koricheva ◽  
Michael D. Jennions ◽  
Joseph Lau
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Temporal Trends ◽  
Temporal Changes ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Stability ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Over Time

The general aim of meta-analysis is to combine scientific evidence scattered through a number of individual studies addressing the same topic. Evidence, however, is not static and tends to evolve over time due to changes in research methods, changes in the characteristics of the subjects being studied, for example. A number of recent studies in ecology and evolution have shown that temporal trends in effect sizes are common and often quite dramatic in these fields. Temporal changes in effect sizes could jeopardize the stability of conclusions (i.e., the conclusions of meta-analyses on the same topic conducted in different years might differ). For these reasons, this chapter is devoted to temporal changes in effect sizes. It first summarizes the findings of studies that examined temporal changes in the magnitude and direction of effect sizes in ecology, evolutionary biology, medicine, and the social sciences. It then discusses their possible causes, methods of detection, and implications for the interpretation of the results of the meta-analysis.

scholarly journals Application of the Subspace-Based Methods in Health Monitoring of Civil Structures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 3607
Author(s):  
Hoofar Shokravi ◽  
Hooman Shokravi ◽  
Norhisham Bakhary ◽  
Mahshid Heidarrezaei ◽  
Seyed Saeid Rahimian Koloor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
System Identification ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Health Monitoring ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Civil Structures ◽  
Literature Reviews ◽  
Research Gap ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Subspace System Identification ◽  
Insight Into

A large number of research studies in structural health monitoring (SHM) have presented, extended, and used subspace system identification. However, there is a lack of research on systematic literature reviews and surveys of studies in this field. Therefore, the current study is undertaken to systematically review the literature published on the development and application of subspace system identification methods. In this regard, major databases in SHM, including Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science, have been selected and preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) has been applied to ensure complete and transparent reporting of systematic reviews. Along this line, the presented review addresses the available studies that employed subspace-based techniques in the vibration-based damage detection (VDD) of civil structures. The selected papers in this review were categorized into authors, publication year, name of journal, applied techniques, research objectives, research gap, proposed solutions and models, and findings. This study can assist practitioners and academicians for better condition assessment of structures and to gain insight into the literature.

scholarly journals A246 THE GLOBAL INCIDENCE OF ACUTE PANCREATITIS IS INCREASING OVER TIME: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 304-306
Author(s):  
J Iannuzzi ◽  
J H Leong ◽  
J Quan ◽  
J A King ◽  
J W Windsor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Pancreatitis ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Temporal Trends ◽  
Western World ◽  
Common Disease ◽  
Biliary Disease ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Annual Percent Change ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Background Acute pancreatitis is a common disease with significant associated morbidity and mortality. Historically, acute pancreatitis has been considered a disease with multiple etiologies and risk factors but is driven by alcohol and biliary disease. Multiple studies have shown that the incidence of acute pancreatitis is increasing globally among both adults and children. Aims The purpose of this study was to assess temporal trends in incidence of acute pancreatitis globally. Methods We performed a systematic literature search to identify population-based studies reporting the annual incidence of acute pancreatitis. Abstracts were independently assessed in duplicate to identify applicable papers for full-text review and data extraction. Joinpoint temporal trend analyses were performed to calculate the average annual percent change (AAPC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The AAPCs were pooled in a meta-analysis to capture the overall and regional trends in acute pancreatitis incidence over time. Temporal data were summarized in a static map and an interactive, web-based map to illustrate global differences. Results Forty-five studies reported the temporal incidence of acute pancreatitis (static map provided, online interactive map: https://kaplan-acute-pancreatitis-ucalgary.hub.arcgis.com/). The incidence of acute pancreatitis has increased from 1961 to 2016 (AAPC = 2.89%; 95% CI: 2.26, 3.52; n=41). Increasing incidence was observed in North America (AAPC = 2.71%; 95% CI: 1.93, 3.50; n=10) and Europe (AAPC = 2.79%; 95% CI: 1.95, 3.63; n=24). The incidence of acute pancreatitis was stable in Asia (AAPC = −0.28%; 95% CI: −5.03, 4.47; n=2). Conclusions This meta-analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the global incidence of acute pancreatitis over the last five decades and demonstrates a steadily rising incidence over time in most countries of the Western world. More studies are needed to better define the changing incidence of acute pancreatitis in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Funding Agencies None

scholarly journals Customary physical activity and odds of depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 111 prospective cohort studies

2021 ◽  
pp. bjsports-2020-103140
Author(s):  
Rodney K Dishman ◽  
Cillian P McDowell ◽  
Matthew Payton Herring
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Vigorous Physical Activity ◽  
Prospective Cohort Studies ◽  
Over Time

ObjectiveTo explore whether physical activity is inversely associated with the onset of depression, we quantified the cumulative association of customary physical activity with incident depression and with an increase in subclinical depressive symptoms over time as reported from prospective observational studies.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES and CINAHL Complete databases, supplemented by Google Scholar.Eligibility criteriaProspective cohort studies in adults, published prior to January 2020, reporting associations between physical activity and depression.Study appraisal and synthesisMultilevel random-effects meta-analysis was performed adjusting for study and cohort or region. Mixed-model meta-regression of putative modifiers.ResultsSearches yielded 111 reports including over 3 million adults sampled from 11 nations in five continents. Odds of incident cases of depression or an increase in subclinical depressive symptoms were reduced after exposure to physical activity (OR, 95% CI) in crude (0.69, 0.63 to 0.75; I2=93.7) and adjusted (0.79, 0.75 to 0.82; I2=87.6) analyses. Results were materially the same for incident depression and subclinical symptoms. Odds were lower after moderate or vigorous physical activity that met public health guidelines than after light physical activity. These odds were also lower when exposure to physical activity increased over time during a study period compared with the odds when physical activity was captured as a single baseline measure of exposure.ConclusionCustomary and increasing levels of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in observational studies are inversely associated with incident depression and the onset of subclinical depressive symptoms among adults regardless of global region, gender, age or follow-up period.

scholarly journals A systematic review of pharmacist-led audit and feedback interventions to influence prescribing behaviour in general practice settings

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i34-i35
Author(s):  
M Carter ◽  
N Abutheraa ◽  
N Ivers ◽  
J Grimshaw ◽  
S Chapman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Review ◽  
Audit And Feedback ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Randomised Trials ◽  
Prescribing Behaviour ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Introduction Audit and Feedback (A&F) involves measuring data about practice, comparing it with clinical guidelines, professional standards or peer performance, and then feeding back the data to individuals/groups of health professionals to encourage change in practice (if required). A 2012 Cochrane review (1) found A&F was effective in changing health professionals’ behaviour and suggested that the person who delivers the A&F intervention influences its effect. Increasingly, pharmacists work in general practice and often have responsibility for medication review and repeat prescriptions. The effectiveness of pharmacist-led A&F in influencing prescribing behaviour is uncertain. Aim This secondary analysis from an ongoing update of the original Cochrane review aims to identify and describe pharmacist-led A&F interventions and evaluate their impact on prescribing behaviour in general practice compared with no intervention. Methods This sub-review is registered with PROSPERO: CRD42020194355 and complies with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (2). For the updated Cochrane review, the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group searched MEDLINE (1946 to present), EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Library (March 2019) to identify randomised trials featuring A&F interventions. For this sub-review, authors screened titles and abstracts (May 2020) to identify trials involving pharmacist-led A&F interventions in primary care, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias (RoB) in eligible studies. Review results are summarised descriptively. Heterogeneity will be assessed and a random-effects meta-analysis is planned. Publication bias for selected outcomes and the certainty of the body of evidence will be evaluated and presented. Sub-group analyses will be conducted. Results Titles and abstracts of 295 studies identified for inclusion in the Cochrane A&F review update were screened. Eleven studies (all cluster-randomised trials) conducted in 9 countries (Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Republic of Ireland, UK, Australia, Malaysia, USA) were identified for inclusion (Figure 1). Six studies had low RoB, two had high risk due to dissimilarities between trial arms at baseline and/or insufficient detail about randomisation, and three studies had unclear RoB. Studies examined the effect of A&F on prescribing for specific conditions (e.g. hypertension), medications (e.g. antibiotics), populations (e.g. patients &gt;70), and prescribing errors (e.g. inappropriate dose). The pharmacist delivering A&F was a colleague of intervention participants in five studies. Pharmacists’ levels of skill and experience varied; seven studies reported details of pharmacist training undertaken for trial purposes. A&F interventions in nine studies demonstrated changes in prescribing, including reductions in errors or inappropriate prescribing according to the study aims and smaller increases in unwanted prescribing compared with the control group. Data analyses are ongoing (results will be available for the conference). Conclusion The preliminary results demonstrate the effectiveness of pharmacist-led A&F interventions in different countries and health systems with influencing prescribing practice to align more closely with guidance. Studies measured different prescribing behaviours; meta-analysis is unlikely to include all 11 studies. Further detailed analysis including feedback format/content/frequency and pharmacist skill level/experience, work-base (external/internal to recipients), will examine the impact of specific features on intervention effectiveness. References 1. Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, Young JM, Odgaard-Jensen J, French SD, et al. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012(6):CD000259. 2. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.

scholarly journals A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol examining the clinical characteristics and epidemiological features of olfactory dysfunction (OD) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemond Qian-Xiu Tan ◽  
Wai Tak Victor Li ◽  
Wing-Zi Shum ◽  
Sheung Chit Chu ◽  
Hang-Long Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Data ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Olfactory Dysfunction ◽  
Statistical Analyses ◽  
Human Populations ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Analysis Protocol

Abstract Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused recurring and major outbreaks in multiple human populations around the world. The plethora of clinical presentations of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been described extensively, of which olfactory dysfunction (OD) was established as an important and common extrapulmonary manifestation of COVID-19 infection. The aim of this protocol is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on peer-reviewed articles which described clinical data of OD in COVID-19 patients. Methods This research protocol has been prospectively registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42020196202). CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PubMed, as well as Chinese medical databases China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP and WANFANG, will be searched using keywords including ‘COVID-19’, ‘coronavirus disease’, ‘2019-nCoV’, ‘SARS-CoV-2’, ‘novel coronavirus’, ‘anosmia’, ‘hyposmia’, ‘loss of smell’, and ‘olfactory dysfunction’. Systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. Articles will be screened according to pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria to extract studies that include new clinical data investigating the effect of COVID-19 on olfactory dysfunction. Included articles will be reviewed in full; data including patient demographics, clinical characteristics of COVID-19-related OD, methods of olfactory assessment and relevant clinical outcomes will be extracted. Statistical analyses will be performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 3. Discussion This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol will aim to collate and synthesise all available clinical evidence regarding COVID-19-related OD as an important neurosensory dysfunction of COVID-19 infection. A comprehensive search strategy and screening process will be conducted to incorporate broad clinical data for robust statistical analyses and representation. The outcome of the systematic review and meta-analysis will aim to improve our understanding of the symptomatology and clinical characteristics of COVID-19-related OD and identify knowledge gaps in its disease process, which will guide future research in this specific neurosensory defect. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020196202.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of instantaneous wave-free ratio in patients undergoing coronary revascularisation: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. e017868
Author(s):  
Joey S.W. Kwong ◽  
Sheyu Li ◽  
Wan-Jie Gu ◽  
Hao Chen ◽  
Chao Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Coronary Revascularisation ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Collection Form ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionEffective selection of coronary lesions for revascularisation is pivotal in the management of symptoms and adverse outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease. Recently, instantaneous ‘wave-free’ ratio (iFR) has been proposed as a new diagnostic index for assessing the severity of coronary stenoses without the need of pharmacological vasodilation. Evidence of the effectiveness of iFR-guided revascularisation is emerging and a systematic review is warranted.Methods and analysisThis is a protocol for a systematic review of randomised controlled trials and controlled observational studies. Electronic sources including MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase, Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrials.gov will be searched for potentially eligible studies investigating the effects of iFR-guided strategy in patients undergoing coronary revascularisation. Studies will be selected against transparent eligibility criteria and data will be extracted using a prestandardised data collection form by two independent authors. Risk of bias in included studies and overall quality of evidence will be assessed using validated methodological tools. Meta-analysis will be performed using the Review Manager software. Our systematic review will be performed according to the guidance from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required. Results of the systematic review will be disseminated as conference proceedings and peer-reviewed journal publication.Trial registration numberThis protocol is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number CRD42017065460.

Arthrodesis of First Metatarsophalangeal Joint by Plate and Screws for Treatment of Hallux Rigidus (Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis)

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ossama Abdelraoof El Shazly ◽  
Mohamed Mokhtar Abdellah ◽  
Mostafa Abdelnabee Abouzaid
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Metatarsophalangeal Joint ◽  
Hallux Rigidus ◽  
Superficial Infection ◽  
First Metatarsophalangeal Joint ◽  
Non Union ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background With continued loss of dorsiflexion of the 1st MTP, degenerative changes occur within the joint with severe restriction of movement and increase in pain, which leads to the condition known as hallux rigidus. The amount of dorsiflexion may be reduced to 0-10 degrees with pain on both active and passive motion. Objectives Systematically reviewing available evidence from published articles to assess the effectiveness of arthrodesis of first metatarsophalangeal joint by plate and screws in hallux rigidus. The assessment also would encompass safety, side effects, and complications of this mode of treatment. Materials and Methods We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance to the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) statement. PRISMA and MOOSE are reporting checklists for Authors, Editors, and Reviewers of Meta-analyses of interventional and observational studies. According to International committee of medical journal association (ICJME), reviewers must report their findings according to each of the items listed in those checklists. Results Previous results for arthrodesis have been favourable with a union rate of almost 96%. In the present systematic review and meta-analysis, the overall effect estimates showed that the union rates after plate and screw arthrodesis for 1st MTPJ was 96.2% (95% CI 94 – 98.4%). In addition, the overall effect estimates showed that the non-union rates after plate and screw arthrodesis for 1st MTPJ was 4.2% (95% CI 2.4 – 6.1%). Moreover, the overall effect estimates showed that the satisfaction rates after plate and screw arthrodesis for 1st MTPJ was 94.5% (95% CI 90 – 99%). In the present study, the overall effect estimates showed that the overall complications rate after plate and screw arthrodesis for 1st MTPJ was 7.2% (95% CI 2.5 – 12%). The overall effect estimates showed that the malunion rates after plate and screw arthrodesis for 1st MTPJ was 2.7% (95% CI 0 – 6.4%). Additionally, the overall effect estimates showed that the hardware removal and superficial infection rates after plate and screw arthrodesis for 1st MTPJ were 2% and 2.9%, respectively. Conclusion Our analysis showed that plate and screws fixation is effective techniques that can be used for first MTPJ arthrodesis in patients with hallux rigidus. We found that the screw and plate fixation has a significantly lower rate of nonunion compared with the screw alone, as reported by the literature. However, owing to the small group sizes and methodologic shortcomings, we were unable to identify the clinically superior fixation technique for first MTPJ arthrodesis arthrodesis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document