TY - JOUR
T1 - The Chest Wall Injury Society Recommendations for Reporting Studies of Surgical Stabilization of Rib Fractures
AU - Pieracci, Fredric M.
AU - Schubl, Sebastian
AU - Gasparri, Mario
AU - Delaplain, Patrick
AU - Kirsch, Jordan
AU - Towe, Christopher
AU - White, Thomas W.
AU - Whitbeck, Sarah Ann
AU - Doben, Andrew R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2021/6
Y1 - 2021/6
N2 - Background: : Publications investigating the efficacy of surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) have increased exponentially. However, there is currently no standardized reporting structure for these studies, rendering both comparisons and extrapolation problematic. Methods: : A subject matter expert group was formed by the Chest Wall Injury Society. This group conducted a review of the SSRF investigational literature and identified variable reporting within several general categories of relevant parameters. A compliment of guidelines was then generated. Results: : The reporting guidelines consist of 26 recommendations in the categories of: (1) study type, (2) patient and injury characteristics, (3) patient treatments, (4) outcomes, and (5) statistical considerations. Conclusion: : Our review identified inconsistencies in reporting within the investigational SSRF literature. In response to these inconsistencies, we propose a set of recommendations to standardize reporting of original investigations into the efficacy of SSRF.
AB - Background: : Publications investigating the efficacy of surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) have increased exponentially. However, there is currently no standardized reporting structure for these studies, rendering both comparisons and extrapolation problematic. Methods: : A subject matter expert group was formed by the Chest Wall Injury Society. This group conducted a review of the SSRF investigational literature and identified variable reporting within several general categories of relevant parameters. A compliment of guidelines was then generated. Results: : The reporting guidelines consist of 26 recommendations in the categories of: (1) study type, (2) patient and injury characteristics, (3) patient treatments, (4) outcomes, and (5) statistical considerations. Conclusion: : Our review identified inconsistencies in reporting within the investigational SSRF literature. In response to these inconsistencies, we propose a set of recommendations to standardize reporting of original investigations into the efficacy of SSRF.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85106314850&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.injury.2021.02.032
DO - 10.1016/j.injury.2021.02.032
M3 - Review article
C2 - 33795145
AN - SCOPUS:85106314850
VL - 52
SP - 1241
EP - 1250
JO - Injury
JF - Injury
SN - 0020-1383
IS - 6
ER -