Skip to main content
. 2009 Apr 2;130(2):241–249. doi: 10.1007/s00402-009-0866-0

Table 5.

Characteristics of the study of Riel et al. [9]

Methods Observational retrospective comparative study with a historical control group. Mean follow-up 8.2 (SD = 4.5) years
Participants In period 1976–1992 50 simple elbow dislocations, N = 6 treated surgically, N = 44 conservatively, last group re-examined. Reduction without anaesthesia (N = 31) or in local anaesthesia
Interventions Group I: period 1976–1985, N = 20, reduction and immobilisation in plaster for 3–4 weeks, N = 17 patients re-examined, N = 1 telephone enquiry, follow-up 11 (SD = 2.6) years, mean plaster period 24 (SD = 3) days plus data from medical records, last examination after a mean of 6 months
Group II: period 1985–1992, N = 24, reduction and functional treatment day after reposition, N = 18 patients re-examined, N = 3 telephone enquiry, follow-up 4 (SD = 1.8) years, mean plaster period 2 (SD = 1) days plus data from medical records, last examination after a mean of 4 months
Outcomes Range of motions, stability and power not different between groups
After-treatment period group I 12 (SD = 3) weeks, group II 8 (SD = 3) weeks, disability period group I 16 (SD = 8) weeks, group II 8 (SD = 3) weeks, physical rehabilitation period group I 6 (SD = 3) months, group II 4 (SD = 3) months
Notes Sex had no influence on result. No recurrent dislocations
Allocation concealment No RCT, observational comparative study with a historical control group