MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210623466 · doi:10.1002/pmrj.12778

A systematic review and meta‐analysis of patient‐reported outcomes following nerve transfer surgery for brachial plexus injury

2022· review· en· W4210623466 on OpenAlexafffund
Chloe Haldane, Geoffrey Frost, Emmanuel Ogalo, Sean Bristol, Christopher Doherty, Michael Berger

Bibliographic record

VenuePM&R · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNerve Injury and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchRick Hansen Institute
KeywordsMedicineBrachial plexus injuryDashMeta-analysisPatient satisfactionCINAHLMEDLINEPhysical therapyBrachial plexusSurgeryRandomized controlled trialPsychological interventionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the effect of nerve transfer surgery for brachial plexus injury (BPI) on patient-reported outcomes. LITERATURE SURVEY: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched and screened in duplicate for relevant studies on September 25, 2019 and repeated June 24, 2020. METHODOLOGY: The patient population included male and female patients who received nerve transfer surgery for BPI. Further inclusion criteria were: (1) all levels of evidence; (2) published in English; (3) conducted in humans; and (4) report of patient-reported outcome. Two reviewers independently abstracted data regarding injury type, surgical technique, surgical timing, follow-up duration, strength, and patient-reported outcome measures. Quality was assessed in duplicate using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. SYNTHESIS: Twenty-one studies involving 464 participants were included in analyses. The mean age ± SD was 32.4 ± 1.8 (range: 5-77) and 89.2% of included participants were male. The mean time to surgery was 5.6 ± 0.6 months and the mean follow-up time was 48.1 ± 8.4 months. The most used patient-reported outcome was the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), where scores variably improved postoperatively, although the degree of disability remained high. Return to work was reported in five studies, with 66.0% of participants returning to work. Patient satisfaction was assessed in four studies with an overall satisfaction proportion of 64.0%. Pain was assessed in 12 studies using various measures. In studies reporting pain intensity postoperatively, 29.3% of patients were "pain-free" or had "no pain." CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported outcomes following nerve transfer for BPI are infrequently reported in the literature. Although patient-reported outcomes demonstrate variable postoperative improvement, there is evidence of ongoing limitations and postoperative DASH scores report a high degree of ongoing disability. Future studies with greater reporting as well as validation of patient-reported outcomes within BPI are warranted.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.011
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePM&RSame topicNerve Injury and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207