High inter-rater reliability, agreement, and convergent validity of Constant score in patients with clavicle fractures

Time required to achieve clinically significant outcomes after arthroscopic superior capsular reconstruction

PURPOSE

To investigate the time-dependent nature of clinically significant outcomes, including the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit, and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS) after arthroscopic superior capsular reconstruction, and the factors contributing to the achievement of early clinically significant outcomes.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ASCR between March 2015 and September 2020 with complete preoperative and postoperative 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were retrospectively analysed. Threshold values for MCID, substantial clinical benefit, and PASS were obtained from the previous literature for the PROMs. The time required to achieve clinically significant outcomes was calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Multivariate Cox regression was performed to evaluate the variables predictive of an earlier or delayed achievement of MCID.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine patients with a mean age of 64.5 ± 8.7 years old were included. The time of mean achievement of MCID, substantial clinical benefit, and PASS for VAS was 11.2 ± 0.9, 16.3 ± 1.1, and 16.6 ± 0.9 months, respectively. The time of mean achievement of MCID, substantial clinical benefit, and PASS for ASES was 13.2 ± 1.0, 16.8 ± 1.0, and 18.3 ± 0.9 months, respectively. The time of mean achievement of MCID, substantial clinical benefit, and PASS for the Constant score was 11.6 ± 0.9, 15.1 ± 1.0, and 14.7 ± 0.9 months, respectively. The time of mean achievement of MCID, substantial clinical benefit, and PASS for SANE was 14.4 ± 1.0, 16.1 ± 1.0, and 15.5 ± 0.8 months, respectively. Patients with a higher preoperative VAS score achieved an earlier MCID for VAS (P = 0.014). However, patients with a higher preoperative ASES and SANE scores achieved delayed MCID for ASES and SANE (P = 0.026, and P < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Most patients achieved MCIDs around 1 year after arthroscopic superior capsular reconstruction. A higher preoperative VAS score favours faster MCID achievement, while higher preoperative ASES and SANE scores contribute to delayed MCID achievement.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Analyzing outcomes after proximal humerus fractures in patients <65 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

There has been an increasing amount of interest and research examining best practices for the treatment of proximal humerus fractures (PHF). Recent, high-level randomized control trials and many retrospective cohort studies have failed to demonstrate clear benefit of surgical management for these injuries especially in the elderly (generally defined as ≥65 years old). There is a paucity of research available on outcomes after surgical and nonsurgical treatment of proximal humerus fractures in adults younger than 65 years, and comparative data are almost nonexistent. The purpose of our study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the available data to determine if the literature supports surgical management over conservative treatment for PHFs in adults younger than 65 years.

Materials and methods

Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review of proximal humerus fractures was performed using MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases. Studies were included if they reported useable data such as outcome measures for adult patients younger than 65 years. Quality of nonrandomized studies was assessed utilizing the MINORs criteria. Extracted data were analyzed using statistical software with P-value set at 0.05.

Results

Six studies were included in the study for data extraction and statistical analysis. When comparing Constant Scores (CS) and Oxford Shoulder Scores (OSS) of operatively and nonoperatively treated adult patients aged less than 65 years, no statistical differences were found. Furthermore, no statistical differences in CS or OSS were found comparing elderly patients (defined as ≥65 years) and adult patients (defined as 18 to <65 years). Analysis of DASH outcome data did show statistical differences of the three cohorts (nonoperative <65, operative <65, and operative ≥65). Thus, only the limb-specific (not joint specific) outcome score (DASH) was found to be significantly different upon data analysis. Differences in shoulder-specific outcome scores (OSS and CS) failed to meet significance.

Conclusion

The available literature does not demonstrate a clear clinical benefit of operative treatment over nonoperative management of proximal humeral fractures in adult patients younger than 65 years. These results challenge the widely accepted practice of choosing surgical treatment in adult patients younger than 65 years with PHFs.

How to Assess Shoulder Functionality: A Systematic Review of Existing Validated Outcome Measures

The objective of this review was to compile validated functional shoulder assessment tools and analyse the methodological quality of their validations. Secondarily, we aimed to provide a comparison of the tools, including parameter descriptions, indications/applications, languages and operating instructions, to choose the most suitable for future clinical and research approaches. A systematic review (PRISMA) was conducted using: PubMed, WoS Scopus, CINHAL, Dialnet and reference lists until 2020. The main criteria for inclusion were that papers were original studies of validated tools or validation studies. Pre-established tables showed tools, validations, items/components, etc. The QUADAS-2 and COSMIN-RB were used to assess the methodological quality of validations. Ultimately, 85 studies were selected, 32 tools and 111 validations. Risk of bias scored lower than applicability, and patient selection got the best scores (QUADAS-2). Internal consistency had the highest quality and PROMs development the lowest (COSMIN-RB). Responsiveness was the most analysed metric property. Modified UCLA and SST obtained the highest quality in shoulder instability surgery, and SPADI in pain. The most approached topic was activities of daily living (81%). We compiled 32 validated functional shoulder assessment tools, and conducted an analysis of the methodological quality of 111 validations associated with them. Modified UCLA and SST showed the highest methodological quality in instability surgery and SPADI in pain.

Neither operative nor nonoperative approach is superior for treating displaced midshaft clavicle fractures: a partially blinded randomized controlled clinical trial

AIMS

To compare the functionality of adults with displaced mid-shaft clavicular fractures treated either operatively or nonoperatively and to compare the relative risk of nonunion and reoperation between the two groups.

METHODS

Based on specific eligibility criteria, 120 adults (median age 37.5 years (interquartile range (18 to 61)) and 84% males (n = 101)) diagnosed with an acute displaced mid-shaft fracture were recruited, and randomized to either the operative (n = 60) or nonoperative (n = 60) treatment group. This randomized controlled, partially blinded trial followed patients for 12 months following initial treatment. Functionality was assessed by the Constant score (CS) (assessor blinded to treatment) and Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score. Clinical and radiological evaluation, and review of patient files for complications and reoperations, were added as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

At 12 months, 87.5% of patients (n = 105) were available for analysis. The two groups were well balanced based on demographic and fracture-related characteristics. At six weeks of follow-up a significant difference in DASH score (p < 0.001) was found in favour of operative treatment. The functionality at 12 months of follow-up based on CS and DASH was excellent in both groups (CS > 90 points and DASH < 10 points) with no significant difference (p = 0.277 for DASH and p = 0.184 for CS) between the two groups. The risk of symptomatic nonunion was significantly higher in the nonoperative group (p = 0.014), with a relative risk of 9.47 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26 to 71.53) in this group compared to the operative group. The number-needed-to-treat to avoid one symptomatic nonunion was 6.2. Initial treatment and age were factors significantly associated with nonunion in a logistic analysis. There were 26% in both groups (n = 14 in operative group and n = 15 in nonoperative group) who required secondary surgery, with most indications in the nonoperative group mandatory due to nonunion compared to most relative indications in the operative group requiring intervention due to implant irritation.

CONCLUSION

Superiority was not identified with either an all-operative or all-nonoperative approach. The functionality at short term (within six weeks) seems igreater following operative treatment but was not found at one year. The risk of nonunion is significantly higher with nonoperative treatment. However, an all-operative approach to lower the nonunion risk may result in unnecessary surgery and is not recommended. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):762-768.

Quantifying the minimal and substantial clinical benefit of the Constant-Murley score and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score in patients with calcific tendinitis of the rotator cuff

Background

To aid the interpretation of clinical outcome scores, it is important to determine the measurement properties. The aim of this study was to establish the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) for the Constant-Murley score and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score in patients with long-lasting rotator cuff calcific tendinitis treated with high-energy extracorporeal shockwave therapy and ultrasound guided needling. The secondary purpose was to assess the responsiveness of both questionnaires and to identify variables associated with achieving the MCID and SCB.

Methods

A prospective cohort of 80 patients with rotator cuff calcific tendinitis was analyzed. Two anchor-based methods were used to calculate the MCID and SCB. Effect sizes and standardized response means were calculated to assess the responsiveness. Additional univariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with the achievement of the MCID and SCB.

Results

For the Constant-Murley score, we found an MCID and SCB of 9.8 and 19.9, respectively, based on the mean change method and 5.5 and 10.5, respectively, based on receiver operating characteristic analysis. For the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, we found an MCID and SCB of –8.2 and –19.6, respectively, with the former and –11.7 and –12.5, respectively, with the latter. The responsiveness of both outcome measures was good, with large effect sizes and standardized response means. The radiographic resorption after 6 weeks and after 6 months appeared to be the most important positive predictor for achieving the MCID and SCB after 6 months.

Conclusion

This study established the MCID, SCB, and responsiveness for patients with long-lasting rotator cuff calcific tendinitis who were treated with minimally invasive treatment options. With this information, physicians can distinguish between a statistically significant difference and a clinically relevant benefit. Successful radiographic resorption after 6 weeks and after 6 months was associated with achieving clinically significant improvement after treatment.

No need to use both Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand and Constant-Murley score in studies of midshaft clavicular fractures

Background and purpose - Most newer randomized studies examining plate fixation and nonoperative treatment of midshaft clavicular fractures utilize both Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and Constant-Murley score (CS) in the evaluation of patient outcomes. Compared with DASH, the use of CS requires on-site trained personnel and patient visits to obtain the score. The use of both DASH and CS should provide extra value compared with the use of a single functional outcome score; if this value is not provided, the combined use is not necessary. We evaluated the agreement between DASH and CS in patients with displaced midshaft clavicular fractures.Patients and methods - We used prospectively collected data from 146 patients enrolled in a randomized study comparing operative and nonoperative treatment of midshaft clavicular fractures. We determined correlation between DASH and CS at all follow-up points and calculated mean bias in the Bland-Altman plot.Results - We found moderate to high correlation (from 0.82 at 6 weeks' follow-up to 0.58 at 1-year follow-up) between DASH and CS score, and a small bias (2.21 [95% CI 0.22-4.20]) in the Bland-Altman plot.Interpretation - In patients with displaced midshaft clavicular fractures DASH and CS measures the same degree of disability. Unless specifically studying strength and range of motion, we recommend the sole use of DASH as it would eliminate potential observer-induced bias along with removing the economic and logistic burden of obtaining CS without compromising the value of the collected data.

Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating acromioclavicular dislocation of the shoulder in adults

BACKGROUND

Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint is one of the most common shoulder injuries in a sport-active population. The question of whether surgery should be used remains controversial. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of surgical versus conservative (non-surgical) interventions for treating acromioclavicular dislocations in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (to June 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2019, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1946 to June 2019), Embase (1980 to June 2019), and LILACS (1982 to June 2019), trial registries, and reference lists of articles. There were no restrictions based on language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised and quasi-randomised trials that compared surgical with conservative treatment of acromioclavicular dislocation in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently performed study screening and selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and data extraction. We pooled data where appropriate and used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five randomised trials and one quasi-randomised trial. The included trials involved 357 mainly young adults, the majority of whom were male, with acute acromioclavicular dislocation. The strength of the findings in all studies was limited due to design features, invariably lack of blinding, that carry a high risk of bias. Fixation of the acromioclavicular joint using hook plates, tunnelled suspension devices, coracoclavicular screws, acromioclavicular pins, or (usually threaded) wires was compared with supporting the arm in a sling or similar device. After surgery, the arm was also supported in a sling or similar device in all trials. Where described in the trials, both groups had exercise-based rehabilitation. We downgraded the evidence for all outcomes at least two levels, invariably for serious risk of bias and serious imprecision.Low-quality evidence from two studies showed no evidence of a difference between groups in shoulder function at one year, assessed using the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH) (0 (best function) to 100 (worst function)): mean difference (MD) 0.73 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.70 to 4.16; 112 participants. These results were consistent with other measures of function at one-year or longer follow-up, including non-validated outcome scores reported by three studies. There is low-quality evidence that function at six weeks may be better after conservative treatment, indicating an earlier recovery. Very low-quality evidence from one trial found no difference between groups in participants reporting pain at one year: risk ratio (RR) 1.32, 95% CI 0.54 to 3.19; 79 participants. There is very low-quality evidence that surgery may not reduce the risk of treatment failure, usually resulting in non-routine secondary surgery: 14/168 versus 15/174; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.94; 342 participants, 6 studies. The main source of treatment failure was complications related to surgical implants in the surgery group and persistent symptoms, mainly discomfort, due to the acromioclavicular dislocation in the conservatively treated group.There is low-quality evidence from two studies that there may be little or no difference between groups in the return to former activities (sports or work) at one year: 57/67 versus 62/70; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.10; 137 participants, 2 studies. Low-quality but consistent evidence from four studies indicated an earlier recovery in conservatively treated participants compared with those treated with surgery. There is low-quality evidence of no clinically important difference between groups at one year in quality of life scores, measured using the 36-item or 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36 or SF-12) (0-to-100 scale, where 100 is best score), in either the physical component (MD -0.63, 95% CI -2.63 to 1.37; 122 participants, 2 studies) or mental component (MD 0.47 points, 95% CI -1.51 to 2.44; 122 participants). There is very low-quality and clinically heterogenous evidence of a greater risk of an adverse event after surgery: 45/168 versus 16/174; RR 2.82, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.82; 342 participants, 6 studies; I² = 48%. Common adverse outcomes were hardware complications or discomfort (18.5%) and infection (8.7%) in the surgery group and persistent symptoms (7.1%), mainly discomfort, in the conservatively treated group. The majority of surgical complications occurred in older studies testing now-outdated devices known for their high risk of complications. The very low-quality evidence from one study (70 participants) means that we are uncertain whether there is a between-group difference in patient dissatisfaction with cosmetic results.It is notable that the evidence for function, return to former activities, and quality of life came from the two most recently conducted studies, which tested currently used devices and interventions in clearly defined participant populations that represented the commonly perceived population for which there is uncertainty over the use of surgery. There were insufficient data to conduct subgroup analysis relating to type of injury and whether surgery involved ligament reconstruction or not.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low-quality evidence that surgical treatment has no additional benefits in terms of function, return to former activities, and quality of life at one year compared with conservative treatment. There is, however, low-quality evidence that people treated conservatively had improved function at six weeks compared with surgical management. There is very low-quality evidence of little difference between the two treatments in pain at one year, treatment failure usually resulting in secondary surgery, or patient satisfaction with cosmetic result. Although surgery may result in more people sustaining adverse events, this varied between the trials, being more common in techniques such as K-wire fixation that are rarely used today. There remains a need to consider the balance of risks between the individual outcomes: for example, surgical adverse events, including wound infection or dehiscence and hardware complication, against risk of adverse events that may be more commonly associated with conservative treatment such as persistent symptoms or discomfort, or both.There is a need for sufficiently powered, good-quality, well-reported randomised trials of currently used surgical interventions versus conservative treatment for well-defined injuries.

Evaluation of the Constant score: which is the method to assess the objective strength?

BACKGROUND

The Constant score (CS) is one of the most frequently applied tools for the assessment of the shoulder joint. However, evaluation of strength is not standardized leading to potential bias when comparing different studies.

METHODS

Seventy-six patients with fractures of the proximal humerus undergoing open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) were assessed using standardized CS strength measurements at the deltoid muscle insertion and at the wrist in three different arm positions. Variation coefficients were evaluated for each patient and position.

RESULTS

Forty women (57%) and 36 men (43%) were examined 96 months in mean after ORIF. We could state a maximum of 105.3 N difference if measurements were performed at the wrist or the insertion of the deltoid muscle in 90° forward flexion on the injured arm (167.9 ± 83.1 N; 62.6 ± 29.4 N). The lowest variation coefficient of the three performed measurements could be stated at the deltoid muscle insertion in a 90° abduction position in the scapula plane (6.94 ± 5.5).

CONCLUSION

Following our study results, different positions of force measurement can change the total CS by a whole category (e.g. "very good" to "good"). We recommend performing the measurement at the insertion of the deltoid muscle in a 90° abduction position in the scapula plane. Otherwise, even in the non-injured, it is hard to reach a "normal" shoulder function, based on the CS. When using the CS as outcome parameter, authors must give detailed information about the force measuring and use an exact measuring device.

Video examination via the smartphone: A reliable tool for shoulder function assessment using the constant score

BACKGROUND

The use of video examinations (VE) may improve patient care by offering them a low-cost and easy access to physicians, save traveling expenses and shorten waiting time. The aim of this study was to validate the use of Smartphones for distant assessment of shoulder function by comparing the Constant scores (CS) of patients obtained by both VE and conventional face-to-face (FTF) examination.

METHODS

Fifty-one subjects (age 19-80 years; women:men 18:33) who presented to a shoulder clinic with a variety of complaints were prospectively recruited and underwent FTF and VE in alternating order. CS obtained by the two methods were compared. Four patients were unable to complete the VE due to technical problems or non-compliance.

RESULTS

Forty-seven (92%) subjects successfully completed both examinations. The mean difference in CS was -0.53 points (95%CI: -2.6:1.6), with limits of agreement of -7.7:6 points. Agreement of correlation coefficient, accuracy and precision were 0.91 (95%CI: 0.86:0.96), 0.99 (95%CI: 0.92:1.00) and 0.91 (95%CI: 0.86:0.96), respectively.

CONCLUSION

VE can obtain a reliable estimate of shoulder function. The mean video CS was only -0.53 points from the mean frontal CS. Individual variations of CS did not exceed a 7-point distance from the "gold standard" estimate.

Validity and responsiveness of the Nottingham clavicle score in clavicle shaft fractures treated with titanium elastic nailing

BACKGROUND

The Nottingham Clavicle Score (NCS) has been recently described for functional outcome assessment after injuries to clavicle and the Acromioclavicular joint. However; validity and responsiveness are context specific psychometric terms and the NCS has not been previously described in surgically treated clavicle shaft fractures. Aim of the present study was to investigate validity and responsiveness of the NCS in clavicle fractures treated with titanium flexible nailing.

METHODS

This prospective study was undertaken on consecutively operated clavicle shaft fractures treated with titanium elastic nail from November 2013 to August 2016. Functional assessment using NCS was done at two and six months postoperatively. Construct validity was also evaluated by formulating the null hypothesis that there would be no difference in NCS at six months after open and closed reduction and in 15B1 and 15B2 fracture sub-types. The above two hypotheses were formulated based on previous studies that used Constant score and DASH score. Pre-specified hypothesis and results in accordance with the hypotheses suggest satisfactory construct validity. Responsiveness was evaluated using standardized response mean (SRM) and Effect size (ES). ES and SRM values ≥0.80 suggest satisfactory responsiveness. The proportion of patients having the least possible score of 0 points (floor effect) and the highest possible score of 100 points (ceiling effect) was evaluated at two and six months postoperatively. Floor and ceiling effect of <15% suggests satisfactory internal validity.

RESULTS

Thirty six consecutively operated patients were included in the study. The NCS at two months and six months was 69.6 ± 9.6 and 87.2 ± 7.1 respectively. The NCS at six months after fixation was 88.7 ± 4.8 in closed reduction cohort and 84.7 ± 9.4 in the open reduction cohort and this difference was not significant (p = 0.1). The NCS at six months after fixation was 85.3 ± 8.3 in 15B1 clavicular fractures and 89.7 ± 4.0 in 15B2 clavicular shaft fractures and this difference was also not significant (p = 0.07). All results pertaining to construct validity were in accordance with our hypothesis thereby suggesting that NCS demonstrates satisfactory construct validity. The ES and SRM were 1.8 and 2.6 respectively. NCS showed no ceiling (0%) or floor effect (0%) at two and six months postoperatively thereby suggesting adequate internal validity of the NCS.

CONCLUSION

NCS has satisfactory construct validity, internal validity and responsiveness in surgically treated clavicle shaft fractures with titanium elastic nailing.