Preoperative patient expectations of elective reverse shoulder arthroplasty

Can we accelerate rehabilitation following reverse shoulder arthroplasty? A systematic review

Background

There is no consensus concerning the rehabilitation protocol following reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Several patients are expecting to be able to use their arms for sports or recreation shortly after their operation.

Methods

This review was designed as an intervention systematic review with narrative analysis. Authors searched English literature in PubMed and Embase databases from 1/1/1989 until July 2022. Controlled studies comparing rehabilitation protocols for patients undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty were included. Data quality was examined with the Cochrane risk of a bias assessment tool for randomized trials, the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized studies (MINORS) tool, as well as the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

Results

Three studies were finally analyzed. At 3 months post-op, forward flexion was found to be significantly higher in the early rehabilitation group (140.5, 95% confidence intervals (CIs): 135.10-145.89; the delayed rehabilitation group mean was 131.24, 95% CI: 125.73-136.74; p = 0.019). Twelve months post-op, no significant difference in any clinical or patient-reported outcome was shown. More complications were reported in the 6 weeks-delayed rehabilitation group.

Discussion

Newer regimes permit immediate shoulder mobilization but may not be applied to every patient. The lack of strong evidence warrants the need for future controlled studies; subsequently, postoperative rehabilitation should be individualized.

Primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for fractures requires more revisions than for degenerative conditions 1 year after surgery: an analysis from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register

BACKGROUND

Although reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is considered a viable treatment strategy for proximal humeral fractures, there is an ongoing discussion of how its revision rate compares with indications performed in the elective setting. First, this study evaluated whether RTSA for fractures conveyed a higher revision rate than RTSA for degenerative conditions (osteoarthritis, rotator cuff arthropathy, rotator cuff tear, or rheumatoid arthritis). Second, this study assessed whether there was a difference in patient-reported outcomes between these 2 groups following primary replacement. Finally, the results of conventional stem designs were compared with those of fracture-specific designs within the fracture group.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective comparative cohort study with registry data from the Netherlands, generated prospectively between 2014 and 2020. Patients (aged ≥ 18 years) were included if they underwent primary RTSA for a fracture (<4 weeks after trauma), osteoarthritis, rotator cuff arthropathy, rotator cuff tear, or rheumatoid arthritis, with follow-up until first revision, death, or the end of the study period. The primary outcome was the revision rate. The secondary outcomes were the Oxford Shoulder Score, EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) score, numerical rating scale score (pain at rest and during activity), recommendation score, and scores assessing change in daily functioning and change in pain.

RESULTS

This study included 8753 patients in the degenerative condition group (mean age, 74.3 ± 7.2 years) and 2104 patients in the fracture group (mean age, 74.3 ± 7.8 years). RTSA performed for fractures showed an early steep decline in survivorship: Adjusted for time, age, sex, and arthroplasty brand, the revision risk after 1 year was significantly higher in these patients than in those with degenerative conditions (hazard ratio [HR], 2.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.66-3.77). Over time, the HR steadily decreased, with an HR of 0.98 at year 6. Apart from the recommendation score (which was slightly better within the fracture group), there were no clinically relevant differences in the patient-reported outcome measures after 12 months. Patients who received conventional stems (n = 1137) did not have a higher likelihood of undergoing a revision procedure than those who received fracture-specific stems (n = 675) (HR, 1.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-3.17).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing primary RTSA for fractures have a substantially higher likelihood of undergoing revision within the first year following the procedure than patients with degenerative conditions preoperatively. Although RTSA is regarded as a reliable and safe treatment option for fractures, surgeons should inform patients accordingly and incorporate this information in decision making when opting for head replacement surgery. There were no differences in patient-reported outcomes between the 2 groups and no differences in revision rates between conventional and fracture-specific stem designs.

Quantifying success after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: the minimal clinically important percentage of maximal possible improvement

BACKGROUND

In high functioning patients, the ceiling effect associated with many patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) limits the ability to appropriately stratify success. The percentage maximal possible improvement (%MPI) was introduced as another evaluation tool, with a proposed threshold of success at 30%. It remains unclear if this threshold correlates with perceived patient success following shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to compare the proportion of patients that achieved the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and %MPI for different outcome scores and to define the %MPI thresholds associated with patient satisfaction following primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA).

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of an international shoulder arthroplasty database between 2003 and 2020. All primary rTSAs performed using a single implant system with minimum 2-year follow-up were reviewed. Pre- and postoperative outcome scores were evaluated for all patients to determine the raw improvement and %MPI. The proportion of patients achieving the MCID and 30% MPI were determined for each outcome score. Thresholds for the minimal clinically important %MPI (MCI-%MPI) were calculated using an anchor-based method for each outcome score and stratified by age and sex.

RESULTS

A total of 2573 shoulders with a mean follow-up of 47 months were included. Outcome scores with known ceiling effects (Simple Shoulder Test [SST], Shoulder Pain and Disability Index [SPADI], University of California-Los Angeles shoulder score [UCLA]) had higher rates of patients achieving the 30% MPI but not the previously reported MCID. Inversely, outcome scores without significant ceiling effects (Constant and Shoulder Arthroplasty Smart [SAS] scores) had higher rates of patients achieving the MCID, but not the 30% MPI. The MCI-%MPI differed among outcome scores and mean values were as follows: 33% for the SST, 27% for the Constant score, 35% for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) score, 43% for the UCLA score, 34% for the SPADI score, and 30% for the SAS score. The MCI-%MPI increased with greater age for SPADI (P < .04) and SAS (P < .01) scores, meaning that patients with higher thresholds required a greater fraction of the possible improvement for a given score to be satisfied but did not reach statistical significance for other scores. Females had a greater MCI-%MPI for the SAS and ASES scores and a lower MCI-MPI% for the SPADI score.

CONCLUSION

The %MPI offers a simple method to quickly assess improvements across patient outcome scores. However, the %MPI that represents patient improvement after surgery is not uniformly the previously established 30% threshold. Surgeons should use score-specific estimates of the MCI-%MPI to gauge success when evaluating patients undergoing primary rTSA.

The impact of comorbidities on postoperative outcomes of ventral hernia repair: the patients' perspective

INTRODUCTION

Ventral hernia repair (VHR) outcomes can be adversely affected by modifiable patient co-morbidities, such as diabetes, obesity, and smoking. Although this concept is well accepted among surgeons, the extent to which patients understand the significance of their co-morbidities is unknown, and a few studies have sought to determine patient perspectives regarding the impact of their modifiable co-morbidities on their post-operative outcomes. We attempted to determine how accurately patients predict their surgical outcomes after VHR compared to a surgical risk calculator while considering their modifiable co-morbidities.

METHODS

This is a prospective, single-center, survey-based study evaluating patients' perceptions of how their modifiable risk factors affect outcomes after elective ventral hernia repair. Pre-operatively, after surgeon counseling, patients predicted the percentage of impact that they believed their modifiable co-morbidities (diabetes, obesity, and smoking) had on 30-day surgical site infections (SSI) and hospital readmissions. Their predictions were compared to the Outcomes Reporting App for CLinicians and Patient Engagement (ORACLE) surgical risk calculator. Results were analyzed using demographic information.

RESULTS

222 surveys were administered and 157 were included in the analysis after excluding for incomplete data. 21% had diabetes, 85% were either overweight with body mass index (BMI) 25-29.9 or obese (BMI ≥ 30), and 22% were smokers. The overall mean SSI rate was 10.8%, SSOPI rate was 12.7%, and 30-day readmission rate was 10.2%. ORACLE predictions correlated with observed SSI rates (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.12-1.54, p < 0.001), but patient predictions did not (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.98-1.03, p = 0.868). The correlation between patient predictions and ORACLE calculations was weak ([Formula: see text] = 0.17). Patient predictions were on average 10.1 ± 18.0% different than ORACLE, and 65% overestimated their SSI probability. Similarly, ORACLE predictions correlated with observed 30-day readmission rates (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.00-1.21, p = 0.0459), but patient predictions did not (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.975-1.03, p = 0.784). The correlation between patient predictions and ORACLE calculations for readmissions was weak ([Formula: see text] = 0.27). Patient predictions were on average 2.4 ± 14.6% different than ORACLE, and 56% underestimated their readmission probability. Additionally, a substantial proportion of the cohort believed that they had a 0% risk of SSI (28%) and a 0% risk of readmission (43%). Education, income and healthcare employment did not affect the accuracy of patient predictions.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite surgeon counseling, patients do not accurately estimate their risks after VHR when compared to ORACLE. Most patients overestimate their SSI risk and underestimate their 30-day readmission risk. Furthermore, several patients believed that they had a 0% risk of SSI and readmission. These findings persisted regardless of level of education, income level, or healthcare employment. Additional attention should be directed toward setting expectations prior to surgery and using applications such as ORACLE to assist in this process.

[Translated article] Translation, validation, and cultural adaptation of the HSS-ES scale (Hospital for Special Surgery's [HSS] Shoulder Surgery Expectations Survey)

INTRODUCTION

The questionnaire Hospital for Special Surgery Shoulder Surgery Expectations Survey (HSS-ES) is a tool used to assess the preoperative expectations of patients with shoulder pathologies. The purpose of this study is to translate, culturally adapt, and validate the Spanish version of the HSS-ES questionnaire to assess preoperative expectations in Spanish-speaking patients.

METHODOLOGY

Questionnaire validation study, using a structured method where a survey-type tool was processed, evaluated and validated. The study involved 70 patients from the shoulder surgery outpatient clinic of a tertiary care hospital, with shoulder pathologies requiring surgery.

RESULTS

The version of the questionnaire translated into Spanish presented a very good internal consistency with a Cronbach's Alpha of 0.94 and a very good reproducibility with an Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) of 0.99.

CONCLUSION

The HSS-ES questionnaire presents an adequate intragroup validation and a strong intergroup correlation according to the internal consistency analysis of the questionnaire and the ICC. Therefore, it is considered an adequate questionnaire to use in the Spanish-speaking population.

Quantifying success after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty: the minimal clinically important percentage of maximal possible improvement

INTRODUCTION

Changes in pre- to postoperative outcome scores are often used to quantify success after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA). However, ceiling effects associated with many outcome scores limit the ability to differentiate success among high-functioning patients. The percentage maximal possible improvement (%MPI) was introduced to better stratify patient success; however, it is unclear if the 30% threshold first proposed correlates with perceived patient success across all outcome scores. The purpose of this study was to compare the proportion of patients that achieved the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and %MPI for different outcome scores and to define the %MPI thresholds associated with patient satisfaction following primary aTSA.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of an international shoulder arthroplasty database between 2003 and 2020. All primary aTSAs performed using a single implant system with minimum 2-year follow-up were reviewed. Pre- and postoperative outcome scores were evaluated for all patients to calculate improvement. The proportion of patients achieving the MCID and 30% MPI were determined for each outcome score. Thresholds for the minimal clinically important %MPI (MCI-%MPI) were calculated using an anchor-based method for each outcome score and stratified by age and sex.

RESULTS

1593 shoulders with a mean follow-up of 59.3 months were included. Outcome scores with known ceiling effects (Simple Shoulder Test [SST], American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form [ASES], University of California-Los Angeles shoulder score [UCLA]) had higher rates of patients achieving the 30% MPI but not the previously reported MCID. Inversely, outcome scores without significant ceiling effects (Constant and Shoulder Arthroplasty Smart [SAS] scores) had higher rates of patients achieving the MCID but not the 30% MPI. The MCI-%MPI differed among outcome scores, and mean values were as follows: 33% for the SST, 24% for the Constant score, 32% for the ASES score, 38% for the UCLA score, 30% for the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index score, and 33% for the SAS score. The MCI-%MPI increased with greater age (P < .003) and females had thresholds greater than or equal to males for all scores assessed, meaning that patients with higher thresholds required a greater fraction of the possible improvement for a given score to be satisfied.

CONCLUSION

The %MPI offers a simple method to quickly assess improvements across patient outcome scores. However, the %MPI that represents patient improvement after surgery is not uniformly the previously established 30% threshold. Surgeons should use score-specific estimates of the MCI-%MPI to gauge success when evaluating patients undergoing primary aTSA.

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty for Proximal Humeral Fractures and Sequalae Compared to Non-Fracture Indications: A Matched Cohort Analysis of Outcome and Complications

Background: With the increase in utility and popularity of the reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) within the last decades, indications for RTSA have expanded. As well as the established indications such as cuff tear arthropathy and massive irreparable rotator cuff tears, RTSA for complex proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients has been proven to be a reliable treatment option. Methods: A prospectively enrolled RTSA database of 1457 RTSAs implanted between September 2005 and November 2020 was reviewed. Patients treated with RTSA for a complex proximal humerus fracture and fracture sequalae (F-RTSA) were 1:1 matched with a group of patients who were treated electively with RTSA for indications other than a fracture (E-RTSA). Matching criteria included sex, age, length of follow-up and body mass index. Evaluation after a minimum of 2 years follow-up included evaluation of the absolute and relative Constant–Murley score (aCS; rCS), subjective shoulder value (SSV), range of motion (ROM) assessment and complications. Results: Each of the matched cohorts comprised 134 patients with a mean follow-up of 58 ± 41 months for the fracture group and 58 ± 36 months for the elective group. The mean age for both groups was 69 ± 11 years in the F-RTSA and 70 ± 9 years for the E-RTSA group. There were no significant differences in clinical outcome measures including aCS, rCS and SSV (p > 0.05). There was a significant difference in mean active external rotation with 20° ± 18° in the F-RTSA group compared with 25° ± 19° in the E-RTSA group (p = 0.017). The complication rate was not significantly different, with 41 complications in 36 shoulders in the F-RTSA and 40 complications in 32 shoulders in the E-RTSA group (p = 0.73). The main complication for the F-RTSA group was dislocation of the greater tuberosity (6%), whereas acromial fractures (9%) were the leading complication in the E-RTSA group. There was also no significant difference in revision rate comparing F-RTSA with E-RTSA (10% vs. 14%; p = 0.25). Conclusions: RTSA for complex proximal humeral fractures and its sequalae leads to a comparable clinical outcome as that for patients treated electively with RTSA for indications other than fracture. There was, however, a significant difference in active external rotation, with inferior rotation in patients undergoing RTSA for fracture. This valuable information can help in requesting informed consent of patients with proximal humeral fractures.

Results after primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty with and without subscapularis repair: a prospective-randomized trial

INTRODUCTION

Indications for reverse shoulder arthroplasties (rTSA) have increased since their development by Paul Grammont in 1985. Prosthesis design was enhanced over time, but the management of the tendon of the M. subscapularis (SSC-tendon) in primary rTSA is still a controversial subject with regard to perform a refixation or not.

METHODS

50 patients were randomized in a refixation group (A) and a non-refixation-group (B) of the SSC-tendon in a double-blinded fashion. SSC-function was assessed at baseline before surgery, such as 3 and 12 months after surgery. Constant-Murley-Shoulder Score (CS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score (ASES), strength, range of motion (ROM), and pain on numeric rating scale (NRS) were measured in all examinations. An ultrasound examination of the shoulder was performed for evaluation of subscapularis tendon integrity at 3 and 12 month follow-up visits. Pain was evaluated on NRS via phone 5 days after surgery. Surgery was performed by a single experienced senior surgeon in all patients.

RESULTS

Patients with a refixation of the SSC-tendon and primary rTSA had improved internal rotation [40° (20°-60°) vs. 32° (20°-45°); p = 0.03] at 12 months of follow-up. Additionally, the A-group had increased CS [74 (13-90) vs. 69.5 (40-79); p = 0.029] 1 year after surgery. Results were strengthened by subgroup analysis of successful refixation in ultrasound examination vs. no refixation. No differences were seen in ASES and NRS 1 year after rTSA.

CONCLUSION

SSC-tendon repair in rTSA improves CS and internal rotation 12 months after surgery.

Higher preoperative expectations predict better outcomes in shoulder surgery patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to determine if preoperative expectations (PE) are an independent predictor of greater 2-year outcomes and greater improvement from baseline in shoulder surgery patients.

METHODS

Two-hundred and sixteen patients who underwent shoulder surgery at one institution were studied. Patients completed both preoperative and 2-year follow-up questionnaires including PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System) computer-adaptive testing in six domains, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, shoulder numeric pain scale (NPS), and the Marx Shoulder Activity Rating Scale (MARS). PE were measured using the Musculoskeletal Outcomes and Data Evaluation Management System (MODEMS) expectations domain, and satisfaction was measured via the Surgical Satisfaction Questionnaire (SSQ-8).

RESULTS

The mean PE score was 86.2 ± 17.8. Greater PE were associated with significantly better 2-year scores for ASES, NPS, MARS, SSQ8, and PROMIS domains of Physical Function, Fatigue, Pain Interference Fatigue and Social Satisfaction. Multivariable analyses demonstrated that greater PE were an independent predictor of both better 2-year scores and greater improvement for PROMIS SS (p < 0.001), ASES (p = 0.007), and shoulder NPS (p = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

Greater PE are positively associated with numerous patient-based outcomes 2 years after surgery. With regards to pain relief, shoulder function, and social satisfaction, higher PE are also predictive of better outcome scores and more improvement. This study suggests that preoperative assessment of shoulder surgery PE is important, and that counseling patients to optimize realistic expectations may lead to superior outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Strength Assessment After Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty

Objective

The main objective was to evaluate the anterior flexion force (AFF) and the lateral abduction force (LAF) of patients who underwent reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) and to compare the measured force with that in a similar-age control group. The secondary objective was to identify prognostic factors for muscle strength recovery.

Methods

Forty-two shoulders that underwent primary RSA between September 2009 and April 2020 met the inclusion criteria and were called the arthroplasty group (AG). The control group (CG) consisted of 36 patients. The mean AFF and the mean LAF were evaluated with a digital isokinetic traction dynamometer.

Results

The average AFF found in the AG was 15 N, while in the CG, the average AFF was 21 N (P < .001). The average LAF in the AG was 14 N (standard deviation [SD] 8 N), while in the CG the average LAF was of 19 N (SD 6 N) (P = .002). All prognostic factors studied in the AG showed no statistical significance: dominance (AFF 0.697/LAF 0.883), previous rotator cuff repair surgery (AFF 0.786/LAF 0.821), Hamada radiological classification (AFF 0.343/LAF 0.857), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) pre-operative evaluation of the quality of the teres minor (AFF 0.131/LAF 0.229), suture of the subscapularis at the end of the arthroplasty procedure (AFF 0.961/LAF 0.325) and postoperative complications (AFF 0.600/LAF 0.960).

Conclusion

The mean AFF was 15 N, and the mean LAF was 14 N. The comparison of AFF and LAF with a CG showed a 25% reduction in muscle strength. It was not possible to demonstrate prognostic factors for muscle strength recovery after RSA.

Clinical and radiographic outcomes following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients 60 years of age and younger

BACKGROUND

Although initially indicated for use in older patients, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is being increasingly used in younger patients. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients aged <60 years to those aged 60-79 years following primary rTSA.

METHODS

154 patients aged <60 years and 1763 patients aged 60-79 years were identified from an international multi-institutional Western Institutional Review Board-approved registry with a minimum 2 years' follow-up. All patients were evaluated and scored preoperatively and at latest follow-up using 5 outcome scoring metrics and 4 active range of motion (ROM) measurements.

RESULTS

Patients aged <60 years were more often male (P = .023), had a higher body mass index (P = .001), higher rates of previous surgery (57% vs. 27%, P < .001), higher rates of post-traumatic arthritis (11% vs. 5%, P < .001) and inflammatory arthropathy (13% vs. 4%, P < .001), and lower rates of rotator cuff tear arthropathy (25% vs. 38%, P = .006). There were no differences in ROM between the groups but patients aged <60 years had significantly lower function and outcome metric scores and higher pain scores at latest follow-up. Adverse event rates were similar between the 2 groups, but patients aged <60 years were more likely to require revision (5.2% vs. 1.8%, P = .004). Patients aged <60 years also had lower satisfaction scores (much better/better 86% vs. 92%, P = .006).

CONCLUSION

At a mean follow-up of 47 months, primary rTSA patients aged <60 years had worse clinical outcomes compared with those aged 60-79 years, with lower outcome scores, increased pain, lower function scores, and less patient satisfaction. Patients aged <60 years had higher rates of previous surgery, inflammatory arthropathy, and post-traumatic arthritis, whereas those aged 60-79 years had higher rates of rotator cuff tear arthropathy. Although complications were similar, younger patients had 3 times the risk of revision rTSA.

Recall Bias in Retrospective Assessment of Preoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Scores After Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Although reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has been shown to be effective for the treatment of cuff tear arthropathy (CTA), the patient's inability to accurately recall their preoperative shoulder condition could skew their perception of the effectiveness of the procedure. Identifying patients who are susceptible to notable recall bias before surgery can help surgeons counsel patients regarding expectations after surgery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether patients who undergo RTSA are susceptible to recall bias and, if so, which factors are associated with poor recollection.

METHODS

Patients who underwent RTSA for CTA by the senior author between September 2016 and September 2018 were identified. All patients completed the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES scores) Standardized Assessment Form at the time of preoperative assessment. Patients were contacted at a minimum of 24 months after surgery to retrospectively assess their preoperative condition.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients with a mean age of 72.2 ± 7.65 years completed a retrospective shoulder assessment at 28.3 ± 7.3 months postoperatively. Patient assessment of shoulder condition showed poor reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.453, confidence interval, 0.237-0.623). Greater preoperative shoulder ASES scores were associated with a greater difference between preoperative ASES scores and recall ASES scores (β = 0.275, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients who undergo RTSA for CTA are susceptible to clinically significant recall bias. Patients with better preoperative condition recall worse preoperative shoulder conditions compared with patients with worse preoperative conditions and are susceptible to a higher degree of recall bias. This patient population should be identified preoperatively and have notable counseling before and after surgery to help them better understand their disease burden and what to expect after surgical intervention.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, diagnostic cohort study.

Characterizing preoperative expectations for patients undergoing reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

There remains a paucity of information analyzing which factors most influence preoperative expectations for patients undergoing reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). The purposes of our study were to characterize preoperative patient expectations for those scheduled to undergo RTSA and to determine the impact of demographic factors, shoulder function, and shoulder pain on these preoperative expectations.

METHODS

Patients were prospectively recruited into the study if they were scheduled to undergo an elective unilateral primary RTSA for a diagnosis of glenohumeral arthritis. Preoperative patient expectations were evaluated using the Hospital for Special Surgery's Shoulder Surgery Expectation Survey. Patients also completed the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder score, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function-Upper Extremity computer adaptive test (version 2.0), the PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) computer adaptive test (version 1.1), the PROMIS Depression computer adaptive test (version 1.0), visual analog scores, and an itemized satisfaction questionnaire, which paralleled the Hospital for Special Surgery's Shoulder Surgery Expectation Survey. Demographic data and preoperative shoulder range of motion (ROM) were also recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 107 patients scheduled to undergo RTSA were included in the study. Relief of daytime pain (n = 91, 85%), improvement in self-care (n = 86, 80%), and improvement in shoulder ROM (n = 85, 79%) were most commonly cited as "very important" expectations. In the item-specific analysis, lower PROMIS Upper Extremity scores were correlated with greater expectations for the ability to reach sideways (P = .015) and the ability to perform daily activities (P = .018). Patients with lower shoulder ROM had greater expectations for improved shoulder ROM (internal rotation with arm at 90°, P = .004) and an improved ability to perform daily activities (forward elevation, P = .038; abduction, P = .009). In the cumulative analysis, a greater number of very important expectations was associated with African American race (P = .013), higher PROMIS PI score (r = 0.351, P = .004), and lower overall preoperative satisfaction (r = 0.334, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Patients scheduled to undergo RTSA have the greatest expectations for relief of daytime pain, improvement in self-care, and improvement in shoulder ROM. Patients with limited preoperative ROM have greater expectations for improvement in self-care and the ability to perform daily activities in addition to expectations for improvement in shoulder ROM. Greater overall expectations for surgery were not associated with preoperative physical function but were instead associated with lower preoperative satisfaction and higher PROMIS PI scores.

Outcomes of shoulder arthroplasty by year of index procedure: are we getting better?

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine whether postoperative patient-reported outcomes improved over time following anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected patient-reported outcomes from our institution's registry between 2008 and 2018 (N = 1899). American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively were required. Univariable linear models were used to test the association between year of surgery and improvement in ASES scores at 2- and 5-year follow-up, as well as any association with age, sex, primary or revision surgery, hand dominance, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, rotator cuff status, primary diagnosis, and Walch classification. Multivariable models were created to analyze ASES score improvement by index year while controlling for significant factors.

RESULTS

In the univariable analysis, 5-year ASES difference scores increased each year by a mean of 1.65 (P < .001; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-2.55) for TSA, 2.50 (P = .014; 95% CI, 0.52-4.49) for RTSA, and 1.64 (P < .001; 95% CI, 0.81-2.47) for the overall population. Patient sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, rotator cuff status, primary diagnosis, Walch classification, and revision procedures were also significant factors affecting ASES scores. On multivariable analysis controlling for these factors, 5-year ASES difference scores were still significantly associated with year of surgery, increasing each year by a mean of 2.20 (P < .001; 95% CI, 0.91-3.50) for TSA, 4.83 (P < .001; 95% CI, 1.17-8.49) for RTSA, and 1.66 (P < .001; 95% CI, 0.81-2.51) for the entire population.

CONCLUSION

Both anatomic TSA and RTSA patients reported increasing ASES difference scores at 5-year follow-up as time passed. These findings may indicate that advances in shoulder arthroplasty have resulted in better patient outcomes over time. Further research is needed to clarify which factors influence improvements in outcomes, particularly for revision procedures.

Is there a difference in outcomes between the first and second surgical procedures in patients who have bilateral shoulder operations?

BACKGROUND

Some patients who have shoulder surgery on 1 shoulder go on to have surgery on their contralateral shoulder. It is unclear whether the clinical improvements following the second surgical procedure are as significant as the improvements after the first surgical procedure.

METHODS

All patients who underwent surgery on both shoulders performed by a single surgeon between March 2013 and June 2018 were eligible for inclusion. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores were obtained preoperatively and at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years for both shoulders. Scores were then compared based on hand dominance and which shoulder was treated first. Complications were also recorded.

RESULTS

Overall, 105 patients (210 surgical procedures) were included. Of the patients, 66 underwent bilateral open shoulder surgery and 39 underwent bilateral arthroscopic shoulder surgery. There was a significant reduction in VAS scores from preoperative to postoperative levels following surgery (5.9 before surgery vs. 1.7 after surgery). We found no difference in VAS scores at any time point when comparing whether the dominant or nondominant shoulder was operated on first. Significantly higher VAS scores were observed at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months following the first shoulder operation compared with the second; by 6 months and beyond, there was no longer a difference.

CONCLUSION

Patients who undergo bilateral shoulder surgery have more pain in the first 3 months following their first shoulder operation compared with their second. However, there is no difference in pain scores at 6 months and beyond between shoulders.

Does preoperative disease severity influence outcomes in reverse shoulder arthroplasty for cuff tear arthropathy?

BACKGROUND

The degree of symptomatic disease and functional burden has been demonstrated to influence patient results and satisfaction in total hip and knee arthroplasty. Although the relationship between preoperative diagnosis and patient outcomes has been an area of study for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), the influence of the progression of cuff tear arthropathy (CTA) has not yet been examined. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether preoperative radiographic disease burden and scapular geometry impact patient outcomes and satisfaction in a cohort of patients with CTA treated with RTSA.

METHODS

Eighty-six patients were treated for CTA with RTSA performed by the senior author (B.G.) between September 2016 and September 2018 and were enrolled in an institutional registry. At the time of initial evaluation, the baseline American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, patient demographic characteristics, history of shoulder surgery, and presence of pseudoparalysis were collected. Radiographs were obtained to evaluate the critical shoulder angle, acromial index, and progression of CTA as assessed by Hamada grading and the Seebauer classification. Patients were contacted to reassess the ASES score and their satisfaction with the improvement in their shoulder function.

RESULTS

A total of 79 patients (91.6%) were available for evaluation at a minimum of 24 months of follow-up. Multivariate logistic regression modeling revealed that scapular geometry measurements (critical shoulder angle and acromial index) and the degree of CTA (Seebauer and Hamada classifications) were not associated with worse outcomes as assessed by the ASES score. However, degenerative changes as assessed by the Hamada grade (odds ratio, 0.13 [95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.86]; P = .03) and preoperative ASES score (odds ratio, 1.04 [95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.07]; P = .008) were independently associated with higher satisfaction at 24 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that patients with greater CTA disease progression did not show differing outcomes after RTSA compared with patients with milder disease. In contrast, both poorer preoperative function and degenerative changes as assessed by the Hamada classification were associated with greater satisfaction after RTSA for CTA. Given the broad spectrum of disease in CTA, there is likely a corresponding range in patient expectations that requires further study to maximize patient satisfaction.

Glenoid lateralization influences active internal rotation after reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Improvement in internal rotation (IR) is not reliably achieved after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between postoperative IR and glenoid-sided lateralization following RSA in an implant using metallic lateralization.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study of RSAs with minimum 1-year clinical follow-up was performed. Patients were stratified based on the amount of glenoid-sided implant lateralization into 4 groups: 0-2 mm (n = 57), 4 mm (n =238), 6 mm (n = 95), and 8 mm (n = 65). The primary study outcome was active IR at a minimum of 1 year postoperatively, measured both by spinal level and in degrees with the shoulder abducted to 90°. Secondary outcomes were active forward flexion and external rotation, belly press strength, and subjective patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. Comparisons were made with 1-way analyses of variance. Linear regression analyses evaluating for the association of glenoid lateralization with active IR were also performed to control for additional confounders, including demographics and other implant variables such as glenosphere diameter, humeral lateralization, humeral version, and whether the subscapularis was repaired.

RESULTS

A total of 455 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 69 years, and 48% of patients were male. IR differences varied by the method of measurement (spinal level vs. IR in degrees with arm abducted). Overall, patients with 8 mm of glenoid lateralization had significantly improved IR compared with all other lateralization groups. Patients with 6 mm of glenoid lateralization had significantly improved IR compared with the 0-2- and 4-mm groups. There were no significant differences in the secondary outcomes or PROs between lateralization groups. In the regression analysis, glenoid lateralization was the only implant-related variable that was significantly associated with improved IR for both measurement methods. Glenosphere diameter and humeral version were both significantly associated with IR measured in degrees with the arm abducted but not spinal level.

CONCLUSIONS

For the studied implant system, glenoid lateralization of 6-8 mm was associated with improved active IR at 1 year compared to patients with less glenoid lateralization with no significant differences in active forward flexion, external rotation, or PROs. In a multivariable analysis, increased humeral retroversion was associated with increased IR at 90° and increasing glenosphere diameter was associated with decreased IR at 90°, whereas BMI, subscapularis repair, and humeral lateralization did not significantly affect active IR.

The Comparative Effect of Age on Clinical Outcomes Following Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty and Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

At many institutions, the pendulum has swung toward reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). Good results have been reported for patients older than 65 years with glenohumeral osteoarthritis with an intact rotator cuff, leading to questioning of the role of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in the elderly. The purpose of this study was to compare outcome measures between TSA and RTSA patients using minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) as a function of age. Primary TSA or RTSA patients with American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores at 2-year follow-up were retrospectively identified from a prospective database. Patients with a diagnosis of inflammatory arthritis, infection, proximal humerus fracture, or revision TSA were excluded. Patients were stratified by age as younger than 65 years, 65 to 74 years, and 75 years or older. A total of 659 TSA and 172 RTSA patients were included. Total shoulder arthroplasty had a larger improvement in ASES scores compared with RTSA in patients aged 65 to 74 years and 75 years and older (P=.04 and P<.01, respectively). In patients aged 75 years or older, the percentages of patients achieving MCID were similar (93.1% TSA and 92.3% RTSA; P=.53); however, a higher percentage of TSA patients achieved SCB vs RTSA patients (90.5% vs 76.9%; P=.01). This study highlights the importance of indications and a shared decision-making model to ensure patient satisfaction. The results support a trend that primary RTSA is a viable option for low-demand patients aged 75 years or older; however, appropriately indicated TSA offers a potential for greater improvement in ASES scores and is more successful at achieving SCB compared with RTSA at 2-year follow-up. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(4):e600-e606.].

Preoperative factors associated with loss of range of motion after reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is a successful procedure, often allowing patients to achieve better range of motion (ROM) compared with their preoperative baseline. However, there is a subset of patients who either fail to improve or lose ROM postoperatively. These patients are at increased risk of poor satisfaction and patient-reported outcomes. To date, characteristics of this subset of patients have not been well described. The purpose of this study is to determine risk factors associated with loss of ROM after primary RTSA.

METHODS

A retrospective review using a commercial international RTSA database (Exactech Inc., Gainesville, FL, USA) of patients who underwent primary RTSA between 2007 and 2017 was performed. A total of 123 (7.7%) shoulders lost ≥10° of forward elevation (FE) (group 1, P₁) and 183 (11.4%) lost ≥10° of external rotation (ER) (group 2, P₂). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed comparing these patients with control cohorts to evaluate risk factors for loss of motion.

RESULTS

Better preoperative abduction, FE, ER, and internal rotation were each associated with greater loss of FE (P₁ < .001) and ER (P₂ < .001) postoperatively. Higher preoperative Simple Shoulder Test (P₁ < .001, P₂ < .001), Constant (P₁ < .001, P₂ < .001), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (P₁ < .001, P₂ < .001), American Shoulder Elbow Surgeons (P₁ < .001), and University of California at Los Angeles (P₁ < .001) scores were also strongly associated with loss of ROM postoperatively. Other factors associated with a higher risk of losing ROM included a diagnosis of irreparable rotator cuff tear (P₁ = .038), rotator cuff arthropathy (P₁ = .017, P₂ ≤ .001), and inflammatory arthropathy (P₁ = .021). After multivariate analysis, higher preoperative FE (P₁ < .001), internal rotation (P₁ = -.018), and weight (P₁ = .008) remained significant predictors of loss of FE. Better preoperative FE (P₂ = .003), ER (P₂ < .001), and University of California at Los Angeles score (P₂ < .001) remained significant predictors of loss of ER. Patients who lost FE or ER were more likely to report lower satisfaction scores than their counterparts who did not lose ROM (P₁ < .001, P₂ < .001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with greater preoperative shoulder ROM or higher patient-reported outcomes are at higher risk of losing ROM after primary RTSA. They are also at higher risk of reporting lower postoperative satisfaction, though the majority were still satisfied. Surgeons should strongly counsel patients with well-preserved preoperative function on the risk of loss of ROM.

Evaluation of Patient Expectations before Carpal Tunnel Release

Background:

Carpal tunnel release (CTR) is common, yet patient treatment expectations remain unclear. The primary purpose was to describe patient expectations before CTR. Secondarily, we aimed to identify factors influencing expectations.

Methods:

Included patients underwent unilateral or bilateral CTR between 2015 and 2017 at a single academic center. Expectations regarding the level of relief/improvement were queried. Area deprivation index (ADI) was used to measure social deprivation. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with expecting great relief/improvement.

Results:

Of 307 included patients, mean age was 54 ± 16 years and 63% were women. Patients most commonly expected great (58%) or some (23%) relief/improvement. Few patients expected little (3%) or no (4%) relief/improvement, and 13% had no expectations. In the multivariable analysis, male sex, lower social deprivation, and lower BMI were associated with expecting great relief/improvement. Age, surgical technique (open versus endoscopic), use of the operating room versus procedure room, and preoperative factors (constant numbness, weakness/atrophy, duration of symptoms, and QuickDASH) were not associated with expectations.

Conclusions:

Most patients expect some to great improvement after CTR. This was independent of several factors with a known association with worse outcomes (advanced age, atrophy/weakness, and constant numbness). Male sex was associated with the expectation of great improvement, in which superior outcomes relative to females have not been borne out in the literature. These findings highlight patient counseling opportunities. The observed association between social deprivation and expectations warrants further investigation, as the socioeconomically disadvantaged experience worse healthcare outcomes in general.

Prospective Comparative Study of Preoperative Expectations and Postoperative Outcomes in Anatomic and Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty

Background  Compared with anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA), reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is associated with lower preoperative and postoperative outcome scores and range of motion. It is unknown whether patients' preoperative expectations of surgery are lower in RTSA compared with aTSA. The purpose of this study was to assess preoperative patient expectations and postoperative outcomes in aTSA and RTSA. Methods  A consecutive series of patients undergoing primary aTSA for diagnosis of osteoarthritis or primary RTSA for diagnosis of rotator cuff tear arthropathy were studied prospectively. Expectations were evaluated using the validated Hospital for Special Surgery's Shoulder Surgery Expectations Survey. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, and social factors were collected. Baseline and 2 years postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, visual analog scale pain, Single Assessment Number Evaluation (SANE), and patient satisfaction were obtained. Results  There were 128 patients (64 aTSA and 64 RTSA). There was no significant difference in total preoperative expectations score between groups. On multivariate linear regression analysis, aTSA ( p  = 0.024) and younger age ( p  = 0.018) were associated with higher expectations for improved ability to exercise. Changes in preoperative to postoperative ASES ( p  = 0.004) and SANE ( p  = 0.001) scores were higher in the aTSA group. Total preoperative expectations score was not correlated with postoperative functional outcomes or satisfaction in either group. In the aTSA group, expectations for participation in exercise were positively correlated with changes in preoperative to postoperative ASES score ( p  = 0.01) and SANE score ( p  = 0.01). Conclusion  Though patients undergoing primary aTSA demonstrated greater improvement in functional outcome than those undergoing primary RTSA, both groups reported similar aggregate preoperative expectations. Those undergoing aTSA had higher expectations for return to exercise which was positively correlated with postoperative functional outcomes. Level of Evidence  Level II, prospective cohort study.

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty clinical and patient-reported outcomes and complications stratified by preoperative diagnosis: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to investigate differences in clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and complication types and rates among preoperative diagnoses following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA): rotator cuff tear arthropathy, primary osteoarthritis, massive irreparable rotator cuff tear, proximal humeral fracture, rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and revision of anatomic arthroplasty (Rev).

LITERATURE SEARCH

Three electronic databases were searched from inception to January 2020.

STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA

The inclusion criteria were (1) patients with a minimum age of 60 years who underwent RTSA for the stated preoperative diagnoses, (2) a minimum of 2 years' follow-up, and (3) preoperative and postoperative values for clinical outcomes and PROs.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Risk of bias was determined by the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies tool and the modified Downs and Black tool. Weighted means for clinical outcomes and PROs were calculated for each preoperative diagnosis.

RESULTS

A total of 53 studies were included, of which 36 (68%) were level IV retrospective case series. According to the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies tool, 33 studies (62%) showed a high risk of bias; the 3 randomized controlled trials showed a low risk of bias on the modified Downs and Black tool. RTSA improved clinical outcomes and PROs for all preoperative diagnoses. The Rev group had poorer final outcomes as noted by a lower American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (69) and lower pain score (1.8) compared with the other preoperative diagnoses (78-82 and 0.4-1.4, respectively). The RA group showed the highest complication rate (28%), whereas the osteoarthritis group showed the lowest rate (1.4%).

CONCLUSION

Studies in the RTSA literature predominantly showed a high risk of bias. All preoperative diagnoses showed improvements; Rev patients showed the worse clinical outcomes and PROs, and RA patients showed higher complication rates. The preoperative diagnosis in RTSA patients can impact outcomes and complications.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty in patients younger than 65 years, minimum 5-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Indications for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) are expanding, and more young patients are undergoing RTSA. Younger patients are expected to place increased functional demands on their shoulder, which may affect implant performance and longevity. Reports on longer-term outcomes in young patients remain limited. This study evaluates the minimum 5-year functional outcomes of RTSA in patients younger than 65 years.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed using a multinational prospective shoulder arthroplasty database of a single implant system, Exactech Equinoxe (Gainesville, FL, USA). All RTSAs performed between 2007 and 2014 in patients younger than 65 years with minimum 5-year follow-up were included. Shoulder function was assessed preoperatively and at last follow-up via range-of-motion measurements and multiple patient-reported outcome measures.

RESULTS

Fifty-two shoulders were evaluated at an average follow-up of 6.3 years. Abduction, forward flexion, internal rotation, and Simple Shoulder Test, Constant, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, University of California-Los Angeles, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, and visual analog scale scores all showed statistically significant improvements greater than the minimum clinically important difference at the time of last follow-up. Three patients (5.8%) required revision surgery after a mean of 7.5 years and 1 more suffered an acromial stress fracture, bringing the total complication rate to 7.7%. Five patients (9.6%) demonstrated scapular notching, one of whom required revision arthroplasty.

CONCLUSION

RTSA provides clinically significant improvement in nearly all functional measures at a mean follow-up of 6.3 years in patients younger than 65 years. The implants appear to have good midterm survivorship; only 5.8% of patients required revision.

Improvement in sleep quality after total shoulder arthroplasty

Objective: Poor sleep quality due to nocturnal pain is increasingly reported as a major symptom in advanced glenohumeral arthritis. The current study aimed to evaluate preoperative and postoperative sleep quality, shoulder pain, and function in patients who underwent total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Preoperative factors contributing to delayed improvements in sleep quality were examined.Methods: Patients scheduled for anatomic or reverse TSA due to glenohumeral arthritis were included. Patients completed the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) survey preoperatively, and at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year following surgery. A higher PSQI score (maximum 21) indicated greater sleep disturbance.Results: Seventy-four patients (34 males, 40 females), with a mean age of 65.8 years were prospectively enrolled. Eighty-four percent of patients reported preoperative PSQI scores indicative of sleep disturbance (6 or greater), with a mean of 10.1 ± 4.3. The PSQI score significantly improved to 7.7 at 6 weeks (P = .003), and to 6.1 at 3 months (P = .08). At 12 months, the PSQI was within normal limits (less than or equal to 5) with a mean score of 4.3. A normal PSQI score was achieved by 40.8%, at 6 weeks, 50% at 3 months, 53.7% at 6 months, and 73.9% at 1 year. The ASES score significantly improved from 32.6 ± 17.2 at baseline to 58.4 at 6 weeks (p < .001), 76.1 at 3 months (p < .001), and 85.3 at 12 months. Linear regression demonstrated that the ASES and PSQI scores were negatively associated with each other at each time point. Body mass index and female gender were associated with a delayed return to baseline sleep quality.Conclusion: Shoulder-related sleep disturbance significantly improved at 6 weeks following TSA, and normalized for most patients by 1 year post-operatively. Enhanced sleep quality after TSA was directly related to improved functional outcomes.

Predictors of patient satisfaction after reverse shoulder arthroplasty

HYPOTHESIS

The aims of this study were to determine patient satisfaction and to identify predictors of satisfaction after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). We hypothesized that the majority of patients would be satisfied after RSA and that patients with worse preoperative mental and physical health would be less satisfied.

METHODS

Satisfaction was assessed 2 years after primary RSA with domains for pain, work, activities, quality of life, and overall satisfaction. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported factors were measured using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score, Shoulder Activity Scale score, Short Form 12 (SF-12) mental and physical component summary scores, and visual analog scale (VAS) pain, fatigue, and general health scores. Pearson correlations were used to determine the relationship between patient-reported factors and satisfaction. Multivariate regression was performed to control for potential confounding variables.

RESULTS

A total of 161 patients were evaluated at 2 years postoperatively. Patients were "very satisfied" in an average of 3.3 of the 5 domains. Improvements in ASES, Shoulder Activity Scale, VAS pain, and SF-12 physical component summary scores were associated with higher satisfaction, with correlation coefficients ranging from 0.27 to 0.49. On multivariate analysis, patients with higher preoperative ASES scores were less satisfied after surgery (P = .005). In addition, patients with worse VAS fatigue (P = .011) and SF-12 mental (P = .034) and physical (0.011) component summary scores preoperatively had lower satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Improvements in pain and outcome scores are associated with increased satisfaction. Patients with higher shoulder function, worse physical health, and worse mental health prior to surgery are more likely to have lower satisfaction after RSA.