Early mobilisation for elbow fractures in adults.

BACKGROUND: A fall on the outstretched arm can result in an elbow fracture. Loss of elbow function is a common problem with these fractures and can have major implications for functional capabilities. It is unknown whether early mobilisation can improve functional outcome without increasing complications. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects (benefits and harms) of early mobilisation versus delayed mobilisation of the elbow after elbow fractures in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (August 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1950 to August 2010), EMBASE (1980 to August 2010), CINAHL (1982 to June 2010), PEDro (31 May 2010), and ongoing trials registers (April 2010). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials evaluating early mobilisation of the elbow joint after elbow fracture in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. There was no pooling of data. MAIN RESULTS: We included one trial reporting outcome at follow-up times ranging between two and 47 months for 81 participants with Mason type 1 and 2 radial head fractures. This poorly-reported trial was at particular high risk of detection and reporting biases. The trial found no significant differences between early and delayed mobilisation in the numbers of participants with pain or limitations in their range of elbow motion. All participants were reported as being able to use their arms for full activities of daily living and none had changed their occupation or lifestyle. There was no mention of fracture complications. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of robust evidence to inform on the timing of mobilisation, and specifically on the use of early mobilisation, after non-surgical or surgical treatment for adults with elbow fractures.There is a need for high quality, well-reported, adequately powered, randomised controlled trials that compare early versus delayed mobilisation in people with commonly-occurring elbow fractures, treated with or without surgery. Trials should use validated upper limb function scales, and assessment should be both short-term (to monitor recovery and early complications) and long-term (at least one year).

Recruitment manoeuvres for adults with acute lung injury receiving mechanical ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Recruitment manoeuvres are often used to treat patients with acute lung injury (ALI) or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) but the effect of this treatment on clinical outcomes has not been well established. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to examine recruitment manoeuvres compared to standard care as therapy for adults with acute lung injury in order to quantify the effects on patient outcomes (mortality, length of ventilation, and other relevant outcomes). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 2); MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2008); EMBASE (January 1980 to May 2008); LILACS (1982 to May 2008); CINAHL (1982 to May 2008); and Current Controlled Trials (www.controlled-trials.com). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials of adults who were mechanically ventilated comparing recruitment manoeuvres to standard care for those patients diagnosed with ALI or ARDS. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials met the inclusion criteria for this review (the total number of included participants was 1170). All trials included a recruitment manoeuvre as part of the treatment strategy for patients on mechanical ventilation for ARDS or ALI. However, two of the trials included a package of ventilation that was different from the control ventilation in aspects other than the recruitment manoeuvre. The intervention group showed no significant difference on 28-day mortality (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.17, P = 0.2). Similarly there was no statistical difference for risk of barotrauma (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.52, P = 0.5) or blood pressure (MD 0.9 mm Hg, 95% CI -4.28 to 6.08, P = 0.73). Recruitment manoeuvres significantly increased oxygenation above baseline levels for a short period of time in four of the five studies that measured oxygenation. There were insufficient data on length of ventilation or hospital stay to pool results. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is not evidence to make conclusions on whether recruitment manoeuvres reduce mortality or length of ventilation in patients with ALI or ARDS.