Osseous and Ligamentous Scaphoid Anatomy: Part I. A Systematic Literature Review Highlighting Controversies

Buijze, Geert A.; Lozano-Calderón, Santiago; Strackee, Simon D.; Blankevoort, Leendert; Jupiter, Jesse B.

doi:10.1016/j.jhsa.2011.09.012

Cited by 55 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…imaging studies and cadaveric studies; Reilly et al 2006;Becker et al , 2010den Bekerom et al 2009;Liu et al 2010;Buijze et al 2011;Hatzantonis et al 2011;Chandrasekaran et al 2012;Flack et al 2012;Hwang et al 2012;Woon & Stringer, 2012;Chalmers et al 2013;Yammine, 2014a,b,c). Furthermore, current reviews lack a systematic appraisal of study quality (Reilly et al 2006;Becker et al , 2010den Bekerom et al 2009;Kopf et al 2009;Liu et al 2010;Smoll, 2010;Buijze et al 2011;van Eck et al 2011;Funk, 2011;Hatzantonis et al 2011;Chandrasekaran et al 2012;Flack et al 2012;Hwang et al 2012;Woon & Stringer, 2012;Chalmers et al 2013;Yammine, 2014a,b,c). A reason for this can be found in the fact that tools to assess methodological quality of clinical studies cannot directly be applied to anatomical studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Appraising the methodological quality of cadaveric studies: validation of the QUACS scale

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although systematic reviews are conducted in the field of anatomical research, no instruments exist for the assessment of study quality. Thus, our objective was to develop a valid tool that reliably assesses the methodological quality of observational cadaveric studies. The QUACS scale (QUality Appraisal for Cadaveric Studies) was developed using an expert consensus process. It consists of a 13-item checklist addressing the design, conduct and report of cadaveric dissection studies. To evaluate inter-rater reliability, a blinded investigator obtained an initial pool of 120 observational cadaveric studies. Sixty-eight of them were selected randomly according to sample size calculations. Three independent researchers rated each publication by means of the QUACS scale. The reliability of the total score was estimated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). To assess agreement among individual items, margin-free kappa values were calculated. For construct validity, two experts (an anatomist and an experienced physician) categorized the quality of 15 randomly selected studies as 'excellent' (4 points), 'moderate to good' (3 points), poor to moderate' (2 points) or 'poor' (1 point). Kendall's tau rank correlation was used to compare the expert ratings with the scores on the QUACS scale. An evaluation of feasibility was carried out during the reliability analysis. All three raters recorded the duration of quality appraisal for each article. Means were used to describe average time exposure. The ICC for the total score was 0.87 (95% confidence interval: 0.82-0.92; P < 0.0001). For individual items, margin-free kappa values ranged between 0.56 and 0.96 with an agreement of 69-97% among the three raters. Kendall's tau B coefficient of the association between expert ratings and the results obtained with the QUACS scale was 0.69 (P < 0.01). Required rating time per article was 5.4 AE 1.6 min. The QUACS scale is highly reliable and exhibits strong construct validity. Thus, it can confidently be applied in assessing the methodological quality of observational dissection studies.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Appraising the methodological quality of cadaveric studies: validation of the QUACS scale

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It was found that other than the SC ligament, no ligament has been described consistently. 2 Nevertheless, this it attempts to describe those ligaments of the carpus that have been identified in the literature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7 This interdigitation can be referred to as the arcuate ligament, deltoid ligament, palmar distal V ligament, or Weitbrecht oblique ligament. 2 The long radiolunate ligament (LRL) is the central palmar radiocarpal ligament, originating just ulnar to the RSC ligament on the palmar surface of the distal radius. The ligament courses obliquely ulnarly toward the lunate, supporting, but separate from, the palmar aspect of the SLIO ligament.…”

Section: Palmar Radiocarpal Ligamentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Carpal Ligament Anatomy and Biomechanics

Pulos¹,

Bozentka²

2015

Hand Clinics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It comprises the following 3 separate ligaments that form a C-shaped structure: a dorsal ligament that provides most of the tensile strength; a volar ligament with thinner, obliquely oriented fibers; and a proximal portion that blends with the articular cartilage of the carpus. 4,5 In 1974, Sebald et al 6 described SLAC as the terminal consequence of a chronically incompetent SLIL. 1 As the normal opposing forces at the SL interval are lost, the scaphoid falls into flexion while the lunate falls into extension to create the dorsal intercalated segment instability pattern.…”

Section: Anatomy and Biomechanicsmentioning

confidence: 99%