-
Archives of Disease in Childhood Jan 2021Electronic health records (EHRs) are routinely used to identify family violence, yet reliable evidence of their validity remains limited. We conducted a systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Electronic health records (EHRs) are routinely used to identify family violence, yet reliable evidence of their validity remains limited. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the positive predictive values (PPVs) of coded indicators in EHRs for identifying intimate partner violence (IPV) and child maltreatment (CM), including prenatal neglect.
METHODS
We searched 18 electronic databases between January 1980 and May 2020 for studies comparing any coded indicator of IPV or CM including prenatal neglect defined as neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) or fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS), against an independent reference standard. We pooled PPVs for each indicator using random effects meta-analyses.
RESULTS
We included 88 studies (3 875 183 individuals) involving 15 indicators for identifying CM in the prenatal period and childhood (0-18 years) and five indicators for IPV among women of reproductive age (12-50 years). Based on the International Classification of Disease system, the pooled PPV was over 80% for NAS (16 studies) but lower for FAS (<40%; seven studies). For young children, primary diagnoses of CM, specific injury presentations (eg, rib fractures and retinal haemorrhages) and assaults showed a high PPV for CM (pooled PPVs: 55.9%-87.8%). Indicators of IPV in women had a high PPV, with primary diagnoses correctly identifying IPV in >85% of cases.
CONCLUSIONS
Coded indicators in EHRs have a high likelihood of correctly classifying types of CM and IPV across the life course, providing a useful tool for assessment, support and monitoring of high-risk groups in health services and research.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Child Abuse; Child, Preschool; Diagnosis-Related Groups; Electronic Health Records; Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Intimate Partner Violence; Male; Middle Aged; Predictive Value of Tests; Pregnancy; Young Adult
PubMed: 32788201
DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2020-319027 -
Injury Nov 2020Surgical rib stabilization in flail chest is proven to be beneficial over nonoperative treatment in terms of rate of pneumonia, Intensive Care (IC) length of stay... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Surgical rib stabilization in flail chest is proven to be beneficial over nonoperative treatment in terms of rate of pneumonia, Intensive Care (IC) length of stay (ICLOS) and mechanical ventilation days. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of operative versus nonoperative treatment on the occurrence of pneumonia and other relevant clinical outcomes in patients with multiple simple rib fractures.
METHODS
A search was performed in Embase, Medline Ovid, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The primary outcome was the occurrence of pneumonia. Secondary outcomes were duration of mechanical ventillation, ICLOS, hospital length of stay (HLOS), mortality, and wound infections. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots for the outcome measures and random-effect models were used when heterogeneity of data on outcome measures was significant (I≥40%).
RESULTS
The search resulted in 592 unique records, of which 14 studies on 13 cohorts were included. The 14 studies comprised five prospective and nine retrospective cohort studies with a cumulative total of 4565 patients. Meta-analysis showed a significant decrease of the occurrence of pneumonia (n=2659 patients; risk ratio, RR=0.66; 95% confidential interval [CI] 0.49 to 0.90; p=0.008), mortality (n=4456 patients; RR=0.32; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.54; p<0.001), and HLOS (n=648 patients; mean difference, MD=-5.78 days; 95% CI -10.40 to -1.15; p=0.01) in favor of operative treatment. No effect of operative treatment was found for the duration of mechanical ventilation (n=113 patients; MD=-6.01 days; 95% CI =-19.61 to 7.59; p=0.39), or ICLOS (n=524 patients; MD=-2.93 days; 95% CI -8.65 to 2.80; p=0.32). The postoperative wound infection rate ranged from 0 to 9.4%.
CONCLUSION
Surgical treatment of multiple simple rib fractures may result in a significant reduction of pneumonia, mortality, and hospital length of stay. A reducing effect of treatment on the duration of mechanical ventilation and IC length of stay, was not demonstrated. However, due to nonstandard or absent definitions of outcome measures as well as heterogenous patient groups and the observational design of studies, results must be interpreted with caution and high-quality studies are needed.
Topics: Flail Chest; Humans; Length of Stay; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Rib Fractures
PubMed: 32650981
DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2020.07.009 -
Injury Aug 2020Blunt thoracic injury is present in around 15% of all major trauma presentations. To ensure a standardised approach to the management of physical injury, patient... (Review)
Review
How does the implementation of a patient pathway-based intervention in the acute care of blunt thoracic injury impact on patient outcomes? A systematic review of the literature.
BACKGROUND
Blunt thoracic injury is present in around 15% of all major trauma presentations. To ensure a standardised approach to the management of physical injury, patient pathway-based interventions have been established in many healthcare settings. It currently remains unclear how these complex interventions are implemented and evaluated in the literature. This systematic review aims to identify pathway effectiveness literature and implementation studies in relation to patient pathway-based interventions in blunt thoracic injury care.
METHODS
The databases Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, WHO Clinical Trials Register and both the GreyLit & OpenGrey databases were searched without restrictions on date or study type. A search strategy was developed including keywords and MeSH terms relating to blunt thoracic injury, patient pathway-based interventions, evaluation and implementation. Due to heterogeneity of intervention pathways, meta-analysis was not possible; analysis was undertaken using an iterative narrative approach.
RESULTS
A total of 16 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in analysis. Pathways were identified covering analgesic management, respiratory care, surgical decision making and reducing risk of complications. Studies evaluating pathways are generally limited by their observational and retrospective design, but results highlight the potential benefits of pathway driven care provision in blunt thoracic injury.
CONCLUSIONS
The results demonstrate the complexity of evaluating patient pathway-based interventions in blunt thoracic injury management. It is important that pathways undergo rigorous evaluation, refinement and validation to ensure quality and patient safety. Strong recommendations are precluded as the quality of the pathway evaluation studies are low.
Topics: Critical Care; Delivery of Health Care; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Thoracic Injuries; Wounds, Nonpenetrating
PubMed: 32576379
DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2020.06.002 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2019Vertebral fractures are associated with increased morbidity (e.g. pain, reduced quality of life) and mortality. Therapeutic exercise is a non-pharmacological...
BACKGROUND
Vertebral fractures are associated with increased morbidity (e.g. pain, reduced quality of life) and mortality. Therapeutic exercise is a non-pharmacological conservative treatment that is often recommended for patients with vertebral fractures to reduce pain and restore functional movement. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2013.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of exercise intervention of four weeks or greater (alone or as part of a physical therapy intervention) versus non-exercise/non-active physical therapy intervention, no intervention or placebo among adults with a history of vertebral fractures on incident fragility fractures of the hip, vertebra or other sites. Our secondary objectives were to evaluate the effects of exercise on the following outcomes: falls, pain, physical performance, health-related quality of life (disease-specific and generic), and adverse events.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases until November 2017: the Cochrane Library (Issue 11 of 12), MEDLINE (from 2005), Embase (from 1988), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, from 1982), AMED (from 1985), and PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database, from 1929). Ongoing/recently completed trials were identified by searching the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov. Conference proceedings were searched via ISI and SCOPUS, and targeted searches of proceedings of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. Search terms or MeSH headings included terms such as vertebral fracture AND exercise OR physical therapy. For this update, the search results were limited from 2011 onward.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized trials comparing exercise or active physical therapy interventions with placebo/non-exercise/non-active physical therapy interventions or no intervention implemented in individuals with a history of vertebral fracture.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials and extracted data using a pre-tested data extraction form. Disagreements were resolved by consensus, or third-party adjudication. We used Cochrane's tool for assessing risk of bias to evaluate each study. Studies were grouped according to duration of follow-up (i.e. a) 4-12 weeks; b) 16-24 weeks; c) 52 weeks); a study could be represented in more than one group depending on the number of follow-up assessments. For dichotomous data, we reported risk ratios (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). For continuous data, we reported mean differences (MD) of the change from baseline and 95% CI. Data were pooled for Timed Up and Go test, self-reported physical function measured by the QUALEFFO-41 physical function subscale score (scale of zero to 100; lower scores indicate better self-reported physical function), and disease-specific quality of life measured by the QUALEFFO-41 total score (scale of zero to 100; lower scores indicate better quality of life) at 12 weeks using a fixed-effect model.
MAIN RESULTS
Nine trials (n = 749, 68 male participants; two new trials in this review update) were included. Substantial variability across the trials prevented any meaningful pooling of data for most outcomes. Risk of bias across all studies was variable; low risk across most domains in four studies, and unclear/high risk in most domains for five studies. Performance bias and blinding of subjective outcome assessment were almost all high risk of bias.One trial reported no between-group difference in favor of the effect of exercise on incident fragility fractures after 52 weeks (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.71; very low-quality evidence with control: 184 per 1000 and exercise: 100 per 1000, 95% CI 31 to 315; absolute difference: 8%, 95% CI 2 to 30). One trial reported no between-group difference in favor of the effect of exercise on incident falls after 52 weeks (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.10; very low-quality evidence with control: 262 per 1000 and exercise: 277 per 1000; 95% CI 139 to 550; absolute difference: 2%, 95% CI -12 to 29). These findings should be interpreted with caution because of the very serious risk of bias in these studies and the small sample sizes resulting in imprecise estimates.We are uncertain that exercise could improve pain, self-reported physical function, and disease-specific quality of life, because certain studies showed no evidence of clinically important differences for these outcomes. Pooled analyses revealed a small between-group difference in favor of exercise for Timed Up and Go (MD -1.13 seconds, 95% CI -1.85 to -0.42; studies = 2), which did not change following a sensitivity analysis (MD -1.09 seconds, 95% CI -1.78 to -0.40; studies = 3; moderate-quality evidence). Exercise improved QUALEFFO-41 physical function score (MD -2.84 points, 95% CI -5.57 to -0.11; studies = 2; very low-quality evidence) and QUALEFFO-41 total score (MD -3.24 points, 95% CI -6.05 to -0.43; studies = 2; very low-quality evidence), yet it is unlikely that we observed any clinically important differences. Three trials reported four adverse events related to the exercise intervention (costal cartilage fracture, rib fracture, knee pain, irritation to tape, very low-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, we do not have sufficient evidence to determine the effects of exercise on incident fractures, falls or adverse events. Our updated review found moderate-quality evidence that exercise probably improves physical performance, specifically Timed Up and Go test, in individuals with vertebral fracture (downgraded due to study limitations). However, a one-second improvement in Timed Up and Go is not a clinically important improvement. Although individual trials did report benefits for some pain and disease-specific quality of life outcomes, the findings do not represent clinically meaningful improvements and should be interpreted with caution given the very low-quality evidence due to inconsistent findings, study limitations and imprecise estimates. The small number of trials and variability across trials limited our ability to pool outcomes or make conclusions. Evidence regarding the effects of exercise after vertebral fracture in men is scarce. A high-quality randomized trial is needed to inform safety and effectiveness of exercise to lower incidence of fracture and falls and to improve patient-centered outcomes (pain, function) for individuals with vertebral fractures (minimal sample size required is approximately 2500 untreated participants or 4400 participants if taking anti-osteoporosis therapy).
Topics: Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Osteoporotic Fractures; Postural Balance; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spinal Fractures; Time and Motion Studies
PubMed: 31273764
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008618.pub3 -
BMJ Open Apr 2019Multiple systematic reviews have reported on the impact of rib fracture fixation in the presence of flail chest and multiple rib fractures, however this practice remains...
OBJECTIVES
Multiple systematic reviews have reported on the impact of rib fracture fixation in the presence of flail chest and multiple rib fractures, however this practice remains controversial. Our aim is to synthesise the effectiveness of surgical rib fracture fixation as evidenced by systematic reviews.
DESIGN
A systematic search identified systematic reviews comparing effectiveness of rib fracture fixation with non-operative management of adults with flail chest or unifocal non-flail rib fractures. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Science Citation Index were last searched 17 March 2017. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Systematic reviews (ROBIS) tool. The primary outcome was duration of mechanical ventilation.
RESULTS
Twelve systematic reviews were included, consisting of 3 unique randomised controlled trials and 19 non-randomised studies. Length of mechanical ventilation was shorter in the fixation group compared with the non-operative group in flail chest; pooled estimates ranged from -4.52 days, 95% CI (-5.54 to -3.5) to -7.5 days, 95% CI (-9.9 to -5.5). Pneumonia, length of hospital and intensive care unit stay all showed a statistically significant improvement in favour of fixation for flail chest; however, all outcomes in favour of fixation had substantial heterogeneity. There was no statistically significant difference between groups in mortality. Two systematic reviews included one non-randomised studies of unifocal non-flail rib fracture population; due to limited evidence the benefits with surgery are uncertain.
CONCLUSIONS
Synthesis of the reviews has shown some potential improvement in patient outcomes with flail chest after fixation. For future review updates, meta-analysis for effectiveness may need to take into account indications and timing of surgery as a subgroup analysis to address clinical heterogeneity between primary studies. Further robust evidence is required before conclusions can be drawn of the effectiveness of surgical fixation for flail chest and in particular, unifocal non-flail rib fractures.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42016053494.
Topics: Adult; Flail Chest; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Humans; Length of Stay; Pneumonia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiration, Artificial; Rib Fractures; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 30940753
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023444 -
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery Feb 2019Rib fractures are common injuries sustained by patients who experience high-impact chest trauma, and they result in severe respiratory compromise because of the altered... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Rib fractures are common injuries sustained by patients who experience high-impact chest trauma, and they result in severe respiratory compromise because of the altered mechanics of respiration. Several studies have shown that the ventilation requirements and incidence of pulmonary complications may be decreased with operative intervention. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of surgical fixation treatments for rib fractures through systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
A literature search was performed in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases for information from February 1958 to April 2018. Studies comparing the benefits of surgical management with that of non-surgical management of rib fractures were included. Statistical heterogeneity was evaluated by the X test with the significance set to P < 0.10 or I > 50%.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies consisting of 839 patients were included (407 patients in the surgical management group; 432 patients in the non-surgical management group). The results showed that the surgical management group experienced a significant decrease in hospitalization time, intensive care time, mechanical ventilation time, mortality rate, pulmonary infection rate and tracheotomy rate compared with the non-surgical management group. However, the surgical management group incurred extra costs, and there was no significant difference in the duration of antibiotic use between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with non-surgical management, surgical management methods are of great value in the treatment of rib fractures despite the added expense.
Topics: Conservative Treatment; Female; Flail Chest; Fracture Fixation; Humans; Length of Stay; Male; Respiration, Artificial; Rib Fractures; Tracheostomy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30813961
DOI: 10.1186/s13019-019-0865-3 -
European Journal of Trauma and... Aug 2019The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to present current evidence on rib fixation and to compare effect estimates obtained from randomized controlled... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to present current evidence on rib fixation and to compare effect estimates obtained from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL were searched on June 16th 2017 for both RCTs and observational studies comparing rib fixation versus nonoperative treatment. The MINORS criteria were used to assess study quality. Where possible, data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. The primary outcome measure was mortality. Secondary outcome measures were hospital length of stay (HLOS), intensive care unit length of stay (ILOS), duration of mechanical ventilation (DMV), pneumonia, and tracheostomy.
RESULTS
Thirty-three studies were included resulting in 5874 patients with flail chest or multiple rib fractures: 1255 received rib fixation and 4619 nonoperative treatment. Rib fixation for flail chest reduced mortality compared to nonoperative treatment with a risk ratio of 0.41 (95% CI 0.27, 0.61, p < 0.001, I = 0%). Furthermore, rib fixation resulted in a shorter ILOS, DMV, lower pneumonia rate, and need for tracheostomy. Results from recent studies showed lower mortality and shorter DMV after rib fixation, but there were no significant differences for the other outcome measures. There was insufficient data to perform meta-analyses on rib fixation for multiple rib fractures. Pooled results from RCTs and observational studies were similar for all outcome measures, although results from RCTs showed a larger treatment effect for HLOS, ILOS, and DMV compared to observational studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Rib fixation for flail chest improves short-term outcome, although the indication and patient subgroup who would benefit most remain unclear. There is insufficient data regarding treatment for multiple rib fractures. Observational studies show similar results compared with RCTs.
Topics: Aged; Conservative Treatment; Critical Care; Female; Flail Chest; Fracture Fixation; Humans; Length of Stay; Male; Middle Aged; Observational Studies as Topic; Pneumonia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiration, Artificial; Rib Fractures; Tracheostomy
PubMed: 30276722
DOI: 10.1007/s00068-018-1020-x -
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related... Jan 2019Multiple rib fractures are common in trauma patients, who are prone to trauma-associated complications. Surgical or nonsurgical interventions for the aforementioned... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Multiple rib fractures are common in trauma patients, who are prone to trauma-associated complications. Surgical or nonsurgical interventions for the aforementioned conditions remain controversial.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES
The purpose of our study was to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the clinical prognosis of surgical fixation of multiple rib fractures in terms of (1) hospital-related endpoints (including duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay [LOS] and hospital LOS), (2) complications, (3) pulmonary function, and (4) pain scores.
METHODS
We screened PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized and prospective studies published before January 2018. Individual effect sizes were standardized; the pooled effect size was calculated using a random-effects model. Primary outcomes were duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit length of stay (ICU LOS), and hospital LOS. Moreover, complications, pulmonary function, and pain were assessed.
RESULTS
The surgical group had a reduced duration of mechanical ventilation (weighted mean difference [WMD], -4.95 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], -7.97 to -1.94; p = 0.001), ICU LOS (WMD, -4.81 days; 95% CI, -6.22 to -3.39; p < 0.001), and hospital LOS (WMD, -8.26 days; 95% CI, -11.73 to -4.79; p < 0.001) compared with the nonsurgical group. Complications likewise were less common in the surgical group, including pneumonia (odds ratio [OR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.27-0.64; p < 0.001), mortality (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.07-0.87; p = 0.030), chest wall deformity (OR, 0.02; 95% CI. 0.00-0.12; p < 0.001), dyspnea (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09-0.54; p < 0.001), chest wall tightness (OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.05-0.22; p < 0.001) and incidence of tracheostomy (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.20-0.57; p < 0.001). There were no differences between the surgical and nonsurgical groups in terms of pulmonary function, such as forced vital capacity (WMD, 6.81%; 95% CI: -8.86 to 22.48; p = 0.390) and pain scores (WMD, -11.41; 95% CI: -42.09 to 19.26; p = 0.470).
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis lends stronger support to surgical fixation, rather than conservative treatment, for multiple rib fractures. Nevertheless, additional trials should be conducted to investigate surgical indications, timing, and followup for quality of life.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level I, therapeutic study.
Topics: Critical Care; Fracture Fixation; Fracture Healing; Fractures, Multiple; Humans; Length of Stay; Postoperative Complications; Respiration, Artificial; Rib Fractures; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30247228
DOI: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000495 -
European Journal of Trauma and... Aug 2019Many studies report on outcomes of analgesic therapy for (suspected) traumatic rib fractures. However, the literature is inconclusive and diverse regarding the... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Many studies report on outcomes of analgesic therapy for (suspected) traumatic rib fractures. However, the literature is inconclusive and diverse regarding the management of pain and its effect on pain relief and associated complications. This systematic review and meta-analysis summarizes and compares reduction of pain for the different treatment modalities and as secondary outcome mortality during hospitalization, length of mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit stay (ICU) and complications such as respiratory, cardiovascular, and/or analgesia-related complications, for four different types of analgesic therapy: epidural analgesia, intravenous analgesia, paravertebral blocks and intercostal blocks.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases were searched to identify comparative studies investigating epidural, intravenous, paravertebral and intercostal interventions for traumatic rib fractures, without restriction for study type. The search strategy included keywords and MeSH or Emtree terms relating blunt chest trauma (including rib fractures), analgesic interventions, pain management and complications.
RESULTS
A total of 19 papers met our inclusion criteria and were finally included in this systematic review. Significant differences were found in favor of epidural analgesia for the reduction of pain. No significant differences were observed between epidural analgesia, intravenous analgesia, paravertebral blocks and intercostal blocks, for the secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
Results of this study show that epidural analgesia provides better pain relief than the other modalities. No differences were observed for secondary endpoints like length of ICU stay, length of mechanical ventilation or pulmonary complications. However, the quality of the available evidence is low, and therefore, preclude strong recommendations.
Topics: Administration, Intravenous; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Analgesia, Epidural; Analgesics; Critical Care; Epidemiologic Methods; Humans; Length of Stay; Middle Aged; Musculoskeletal Pain; Nerve Block; Pain Measurement; Rib Fractures; Young Adult
PubMed: 29411048
DOI: 10.1007/s00068-018-0918-7 -
Pediatric Emergency Care Feb 2019We aimed to estimate the prevalence of abuse in young children presenting with rib fractures and to identify demographic, injury, and presentation-related...
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to estimate the prevalence of abuse in young children presenting with rib fractures and to identify demographic, injury, and presentation-related characteristics that affect the probability that rib fractures are secondary to abuse.
METHODS
We searched PubMed/MEDLINE and CINAHL databases for articles published in English between January 1, 1990, and June 30, 2014 on rib fracture etiology in children 5 years or younger. Two reviewers independently extracted predefined data elements and assigned quality ratings to included studies. Study-specific abuse prevalences and the sensitivities, specificities, and positive and negative likelihood ratios of patients' demographic and clinical characteristics for abuse were calculated with 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
Data for 1396 children 48 months or younger with rib fractures were abstracted from 10 articles. Among infants younger than 12 months, abuse prevalence ranged from 67% to 82%, whereas children 12 to 23 and 24 to 35 months old had study-specific abuse prevalences of 29% and 28%, respectively. Age younger than 12 months was the only characteristic significantly associated with increased likelihood of abuse across multiple studies. Rib fracture location was not associated with likelihood of abuse. The retrospective design of the included studies and variations in ascertainment of cases, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and child abuse assessments prevented further meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
Abuse is the most common cause of rib fractures in infants younger than 12 months. Prospective studies with standardized methods are needed to improve accuracy in determining abuse prevalence among children with rib fractures and characteristics associated with abusive rib fractures.
Topics: Child Abuse; Child, Preschool; Female; Humans; Infant; Male; Prevalence; Rib Fractures; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 27749806
DOI: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000000911