Anne Arthur - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by Anne Arthur

Journal of Hand Therapy, 2004

This review assessed the effectiveness of surgical and conservative management for rotator cuff p... more This review assessed the effectiveness of surgical and conservative management for rotator cuff pathologies. The authors concluded that there was insufficient evidence to draw definitive conclusions and that further research is required. The review excluded individual RCTs included in relevant Cochrane reviews. Much of the available evidence was of a poor quality and the authors' conclusions are appropriately cautious. Authors' objectives To assess the effectiveness of surgical and conservative management for rotator cuff (RC) pathologies. Searching MEDLINE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and PEDro were searched for studies published in English from 1966 to May 2003; the search terms were listed. The reference lists in retrieved reports were checked. Study selection Study designs of evaluations included in the review Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies and case series were eligible for inclusion. The review excluded individual RCTs that had already been included in three Cochrane systematic reviews. Specific interventions included in the review Studies of surgical or nonsurgical treatment were eligible for inclusion. The included studies used electrotherapy, physiotherapy, acupuncture, shockwave therapy, laser therapy, needle aspiration, and surgical interventions such as open, miniopen and arthroscopic surgical repair. Participants included in the review Studies of adult patients with RC pathology were eligible for inclusion. Eligible pathologies included full and partialthickness tears of the RC, lesions, tendonitis and tendinopathy of supraspinatus, infraspinatus and subscapularis tendons, impingement syndrome, calcific tendonitis and bursitis. Studies of patients with RC pathology due to rheumatic disorders were excluded. Outcomes assessed in the review Studies that assessed pain, function, disability, strength, patient satisfaction and time to return to work were included. How were decisions on the relevance of primary studies made? Two reviewers independently selected studies for inclusion. Assessment of study quality The authors did not state that they assessed validity. They did, however, grade studies using a hierarchy of study design: level 1 studies were RCTs; level 2 studies were lower quality RCTs; and level 4 studies were case series. The authors did not state how this grading was peformed. Data extraction The authors did not state how the data were extracted for the review, or how many reviewers performed the data extraction.

Journal of Hand Therapy, 2004

This review assessed the effectiveness of surgical and conservative management for rotator cuff p... more This review assessed the effectiveness of surgical and conservative management for rotator cuff pathologies. The authors concluded that there was insufficient evidence to draw definitive conclusions and that further research is required. The review excluded individual RCTs included in relevant Cochrane reviews. Much of the available evidence was of a poor quality and the authors' conclusions are appropriately cautious. Authors' objectives To assess the effectiveness of surgical and conservative management for rotator cuff (RC) pathologies. Searching MEDLINE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and PEDro were searched for studies published in English from 1966 to May 2003; the search terms were listed. The reference lists in retrieved reports were checked. Study selection Study designs of evaluations included in the review Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies and case series were eligible for inclusion. The review excluded individual RCTs that had already been included in three Cochrane systematic reviews. Specific interventions included in the review Studies of surgical or nonsurgical treatment were eligible for inclusion. The included studies used electrotherapy, physiotherapy, acupuncture, shockwave therapy, laser therapy, needle aspiration, and surgical interventions such as open, miniopen and arthroscopic surgical repair. Participants included in the review Studies of adult patients with RC pathology were eligible for inclusion. Eligible pathologies included full and partialthickness tears of the RC, lesions, tendonitis and tendinopathy of supraspinatus, infraspinatus and subscapularis tendons, impingement syndrome, calcific tendonitis and bursitis. Studies of patients with RC pathology due to rheumatic disorders were excluded. Outcomes assessed in the review Studies that assessed pain, function, disability, strength, patient satisfaction and time to return to work were included. How were decisions on the relevance of primary studies made? Two reviewers independently selected studies for inclusion. Assessment of study quality The authors did not state that they assessed validity. They did, however, grade studies using a hierarchy of study design: level 1 studies were RCTs; level 2 studies were lower quality RCTs; and level 4 studies were case series. The authors did not state how this grading was peformed. Data extraction The authors did not state how the data were extracted for the review, or how many reviewers performed the data extraction.