IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0155659.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ultrasound for Distal Forearm Fracture: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Djoke Douma-den Hamer
  • Marco H Blanker
  • Mireille A Edens
  • Lonneke N Buijteweg
  • Martijn F Boomsma
  • Sven H van Helden
  • Gert-Jan Mauritz

Abstract

Study Objective: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound for detecting distal forearm fractures. Methods: A systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA statement. We searched MEDLINE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from inception to September 2015. All prospective studies of the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound versus radiography as the reference standard were included. We excluded studies with a retrospective design and those with evidence of verification bias. We assessed the methodological quality of the included studies with the QUADAS-2 tool. We performed a meta-analysis of studies evaluating ultrasound to calculate the pooled sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CI95%) using a bivariate model with random effects. Subgroup and sensitivity analysis were used to examine the effect of methodological differences and other study characteristics. Results: Out of 867 publications we included 16 studies with 1,204 patients and 641 fractures. The pooled test characteristics for ultrasound were: sensitivity 97% (CI95% 93–99%), specificity 95% (CI95% 89–98%), positive likelihood ratio (LR) 20.0 (8.5–47.2) and negative LR 0.03 (0.01–0.08). The corresponding pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 667 (142–3,133). Apparent differences were shown for method of viewing, with the 6-view method showing higher specificity, positive LR, and DOR, compared to the 4-view method. Conclusion: The present meta-analysis showed that ultrasound has a high accuracy for the diagnosis of distal forearm fractures in children when used by proper viewing method. Based on this, ultrasound should be considered a reliable alternative, which has the advantages of being radiation free.

Suggested Citation

  • Djoke Douma-den Hamer & Marco H Blanker & Mireille A Edens & Lonneke N Buijteweg & Martijn F Boomsma & Sven H van Helden & Gert-Jan Mauritz, 2016. "Ultrasound for Distal Forearm Fracture: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(5), pages 1-16, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0155659
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0155659
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0155659
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0155659&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0155659?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0155659. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.