Cochrane · systematic review · CD009679
Surgical fixation methods for tibial plateau fractures
McNamara, IR, Smith, TO, Shepherd, KL, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2015 · Cochrane Library
Bone, Joint and Muscle TraumaAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
7
current version
GRADE rated
7
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 6 · 85.7%Low 1 · 14.3%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Circular external fixation with limited internal fixation (hybrid fixation) versus standard open reduction internal fixation
Population: adults with tibial plateau fracture (Schatzker types V or VI)
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Quality of Life: SF‐36 scale from 0 to 100 (higher scores = better outcome) Circular external fixation with limited internal fixation (hybrid fixation) vs standard open reduction internal fixation | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 66 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
HSS score: Scale from 0 to 100 (higher scores indicating greater function) Circular external fixation with limited internal fixation (hybrid fixation) vs standard open reduction internal fixation | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 66 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
WOMAC function Scale from 0 to 100c (higher scores indicating greater function) Circular external fixation with limited internal fixation (hybrid fixation) vs standard open reduction internal fixation | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 66 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Adverse eventse Circular external fixation with limited internal fixation (hybrid fixation) vs standard open reduction internal fixation | RR 0.78 [0.45, 1.32] | 1 study · 83 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
WOMAC Pain subscale from 0 to 100c (higher scores indicating greater function) Circular external fixation with limited internal fixation (hybrid fixation) vs standard open reduction internal fixation | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 66 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Knee total range of motion (degrees) Circular external fixation with limited internal fixation (hybrid fixation) vs standard open reduction internal fixation | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 66 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Return to pre‐injury activity level Circular external fixation with limited internal fixation (hybrid fixation) vs standard open reduction internal fixation | RR 2.5 [0.87, 7.18] | 1 study · 66 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |