Different expectations of patients and surgeons with regard to rotator cuff repair

Frozen shoulder: subjects' needs and perspectives and clinicians' beliefs and management strategies: do they align? A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

Physiotherapists (PTs) play a crucial role in managing individuals with Frozen Shoulder (FS), frequently being the first healthcare professionals involved in the treatment of this condition.

AIM

This study aimed to compare the beliefs, expectations, and perspectives of individuals with FS with the knowledge, skills, and strategies of PTs, highlighting similarities and differences.

METHOD

This study adhered to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). From May 1st to August 1st, 2023, a two-part survey was conducted involving PTs and individuals diagnosed with FS. The survey focused on comparing key areas such as clinical assessment, patient education, treatment expectations, and the psychological aspects of the patient-clinician relationship.

RESULTS

A total of 501 PTs and 110 subjects with FS participated in the survey. Most PTs showed proficiency in FS pathoanatomical conditions and were also attentive to psychological aspects (88.4%), describing the pathology evolution in three or two stages (68.2%). They also highlighted the importance of patient education (89.6%) and recognized the potential benefits of a multiprofessional collaboration in managing FS (82.2%). Reassurance was reported as a priority by 32.3% of PTs. Subjects with FS expressed a preference for PTs who are both expert and empathetic (73.6%). Regarding their understanding of FS, 29.09% of subjects reported receiving a three-phase explanation, while 26.36% felt inadequately informed. Nearly half of the subjects (49.09%) anticipated being managed independently by a PT, with 93.64% prioritizing the improvement of their range of motion.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed a general agreement between subjects with FS and PTs regarding aspects of the therapeutic relationship, patient education, pathology management, compliance and motivation strategies, and pain management preferences. However, significant differences emerged concerning the perception of physiotherapy effectiveness, primary treatment goals, subjects' priorities, and the importance of psychological assessment.

Subacromial balloon spacer massive rotator cuff tear treatment systematic review and meta-analysis: Patient selection and physical therapy may be keys to outcome success

PURPOSE

Subacromial balloon spacer implantation (SBSI) efficacy for massive rotator cuff tear treatment was evaluated based on perceived shoulder function, active shoulder mobility, pain, complications and research study methodological quality. The purpose was to better discern the efficacy of this device from both surgical and rehabilitative perspectives to improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched (1 January 2010 to 1 June 2024) using 'balloon spacer', 'subacromial spacer', 'subacromial balloon spacer', 'shoulder spacer' and 'inspace' terms. Pre-surgery (baseline), 12-month (12-m) and 24-month (24-m) post-SBSI mean changes were compared using one-way ANOVA and Scheffe post hoc tests, and comparative study effect sizes were calculated (p ≤ 0.05).

RESULTS

This review consists of 27 studies with 894 patients (67.8 ± 5 years of age) and 29.4 ± 17-month follow-up. Modified Coleman Methodology Scores (MCMS) revealed fair overall quality (mean = 61.4 ± 11). Constant-Murley scores improved from 34.8 ± 6 (baseline), to 64.2 ± 9 (12-m) and 67.9 ± 8 (24-m) (12-m, 24-m > baseline, p < 0.001). ASES scores improved from 35.1 ± 14 (baseline), to 83.3 ± 7 (12-m) and 81.8 ± 5 (24-m)(12-m, 24-m > baseline, p < 0.001). VAS pain scores improved from 6.6 ± 1 (baseline), to 2.6 ± 1 (12-m) and 2.0 ± 1 (24-m) (12-m, 24-m < baseline, p < 0.001). Flexion increased from 108.5 ± 25° (baseline), to 128.5 ± 30° (12-m) and 151.2 ± 14° (24-m) (24-m > 12-m, baseline, p = 0.01). Abduction increased from 97.7 ± 24° (baseline) to 116.3 ± 23° (12-m) and 142.3 ± 15° (24-m) (24-m > 12-m, baseline, p = 0.02). External rotation (ER) in adduction changed from 33.1 ± 7° (baseline) to 32.5 ± 4° (12-m) and 53.9 ± 9° (24-m)(24-m > 12-m, baseline, p = 0.01). ER at 90° abduction increased from 56.3 ± 3° (baseline) to 83.5 ± 5° (12-m) and 77.1 ± 4° (24-m) (24-m, 12-m > baseline, p = 0.01). Comparison studies, however, displayed insignificant results with small effect sizes.

CONCLUSION

Despite overall fair MCMS scores, at 24-m post-SBSI, shoulder function improved and pain decreased. More rigorous comparative studies, however, revealed insignificant findings. Patients with the potential to re-establish the essential glenohumeral joint force couple that depresses the humeral head on the glenoid fossa and who comply with physical therapy may be more likely to achieve success following SBSI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Treatment expectations of patients and clinicians: a cross-sectional study

Importance

Understanding treatment expectations of patients and their clinicians is of great importance in improving personalized medical services and enhancing patient safety systems.

Objective

To investigate treatment expectations of patients and their clinicians and compare differences between both, by using a pair of validated structured assessment tools covering three key aspects/dimensions of clinical interests.

Design setting and participants

This single-center cross-sectional study was conducted at Peking Union Medical College Hospital in China. The study enrolled patients aged 16 years and older receiving inpatient care and their clinicians. Patient recruitment was conducted from March 2023 to November 2023.

Assessments

In addition to demographic and clinical characteristics, this study employed two validated structured assessment tools to evaluate treatment expectations among patients and their clinicians: the Hospitalized Patients' Expectations for Treatment Scale-Patient version (HOPE-P) and its counterpart, the Hospitalized Patients' Expectations for Treatment Scale-Clinician version (HOPE-C).

Results

A total of 233 patients (mean [SD] age, 52.3 [15.1] years; 108 [46.4%] female) along with their clinicians, who numbered 75 in total were enrolled in this study. The distribution of total scores for HOPE-P and HOPE-C displayed similar patterns, with most scores concentrated in the higher range (above 50% of the full score). The mean HOPE-P total score was higher than that of HOPE-C (mean [SD] score, 38.78 [4.86] vs 37.49 [4.32]; t = 3.12, P = 0.002). In Dimension 2, the HOPE-P score was higher than HOPE-C (23.67 [3.20] vs 21.72 [3.03]; t = 6.98, P < 0.001). However, in Dimensions 1 and 3, HOPE-P scored lower than HOPE-C (13.37 [2.44] vs 13.84 [1.73]; t = -2.384, P < 0.018; 1.74 [1.14] vs 1.94 [1.00]; t = -2.00, P = 0.047). Certain demographic and clinical characteristics led to variations in patients' treatment expectations, including marital status, monthly family income, and smoking history.

Conclusions and relevance

This cross-sectional study revealed significant differences between patients' and doctors' treatment expectations. Notably, it highlighted the need for clinicians to focus on rationalizing patients' expectations concerning treatment outcomes.

Trial Registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Identifier

ChiCTR2300075262.

Associations between surgeons' preoperative expectations of lumbar surgery and patient-reported 2-year outcomes

PURPOSE

Surgeons' preoperative expectations of lumbar surgery may be associated with patient-reported postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

Preoperatively spine surgeons completed a validated Expectations Survey for each patient estimating amount of improvement expected (range 0-100). Preoperative variables were clinical characteristics, spine-specific disability (ODI), and general health (RAND-12). Two years postoperatively patients again completed these measures and global assessments of satisfaction. Surgeons' expectations were compared to preoperative variables and to clinically important pre- to postoperative changes (MCID) in ODI, RAND-12, and pain and to satisfaction using hierarchical models.

RESULTS

Mean expectations survey score for 402 patients was a 57 (IQR 44-68) reflecting moderate expectations. Lower scores were associated with preoperative older age, abnormal gait, sensation loss, vacuum phenomena, foraminal stenosis, prior surgery, and current surgery to more vertebrae (all p ≤ .05). Lower scores were associated postoperatively with not attaining MCID for the ODI (p = .02), RAND-12 (p = .01), and leg pain (p = .01). There were no associations between surgeons' scores and satisfaction (p = .06-.27). 55 patients (14%) reported unfavorable global outcomes and were more likely to have had fracture/infection/repeat surgery (OR 3.2, CI 1.6-6.7, p = .002).

CONCLUSION

Surgeons' preoperative expectations were associated with patient-reported postoperative improvement in symptoms and function, but not with satisfaction. These findings are consistent with clinical practice in that surgeons expect some but not complete improvement from surgery and do not anticipate that any particular patient will have markedly unfavorable satisfaction ratings. In addition to preoperative discussions about expectations, patients and surgeons should acknowledge different types of outcomes and address them jointly in postoperative discussions.

Comparison of Patients' and Surgeons' Expectations before Shoulder Arthroplasty

Background: Patients suffering from osteoarthritis particularly complain about pain during day and night as well as loss of function. This consequently leads to impaired quality of life and therefore psychological stress. The surgical therapy of choice is joint replacement. Regarding the outcome after operation, expectations might differ between the patient and the surgeon. This can lead to dissatisfaction on both sides. This study aimed to document patients' expectations of a planned shoulder joint replacement. The results were compared with assessments made by shoulder surgeons. Methods: In total, 50 patients scheduled for operative shoulder joint replacement were included in this study, as well as 10 shoulder surgeons. Patients were requested to fill out questionnaires preoperatively to provide sociodemographic data, PROMS (Patient-Reported Outcome Measures) with regard to the pathology and their expectations about surgery in terms of pain relief, gain of range of motion, strength as well as the impact on activities of daily and professional life and sports. In addition, surgeons were asked what they thought their patients expect. Results: The most important goal to achieve for patients was to relieve daytime pain, followed by improvement of self-care and the ability to reach above shoulder level. The most important factors for patients to achieve after operation were 'pain relief' in first place, 'movement' in second and 'strength' in third. This also applied to shoulder surgeons, who ranked 'pain relief' first, followed by 'movement' and 'strength'. When patients where asked what is most important when it comes to choosing their surgeon, 68% voted for 'surgical skills', 28% for 'age/experience', followed by 'empathy', 'sympathy' and 'appearance'. For surgeons, 'age/experience' obtained rank one, 'surgical skills' was ranked second, followed by 'sympathy', 'empathy' and 'appearance'. Surgeons significantly underrated the factor 'empathy' in favor of 'sympathy'. Conclusions: This study shows that patients' expectations for shoulder joint replacement and surgeons' assessments do not differ significantly. Relief from pain and better shoulder movement were crucial for patients to achieve after operation, which was in line with surgeons' expectations. The most important factor for choosing the surgeon was 'surgical skills' for patients, while surgeons thought they would care more about 'age and experience'. This underlines that patients' expectations should be taken into account within the preoperative medical interview. This might allow an optimization of compliance of the patients and lead to a better satisfaction on both sides.

Evaluation of information from artificial intelligence on rotator cuff repair surgery

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to analyze the quality and readability of information regarding rotator cuff repair surgery available using an online AI software.

Methods

An open AI model (ChatGPT) was used to answer 24 commonly asked questions from patients on rotator cuff repair. Questions were stratified into one of three categories based on the Rothwell classification system: fact, policy, or value. The answers for each category were evaluated for reliability, quality and readability using The Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark criteria, DISCERN score, Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease Score and Grade Level.

Results

The Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark criteria score for all three categories was 0, which is the lowest score indicating no reliable resources cited. The DISCERN score was 51 for fact, 53 for policy, and 55 for value questions, all of which are considered good scores. Across question categories, the reliability portion of the DISCERN score was low, due to a lack of resources. The Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease Score (and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level) was 48.3 (10.3) for the fact class, 42.0 (10.9) for the policy class, and 38.4 (11.6) for the value class.

Conclusion

The quality of information provided by the open AI chat system was generally high across all question types but had significant shortcomings in reliability due to the absence of source material citations. The DISCERN scores of the AI generated responses matched or exceeded previously published results of studies evaluating the quality of online information about rotator cuff repairs. The responses were U.S. 10th grade or higher reading level which is above the AMA and NIH recommendation of 6th grade reading level for patient materials. The AI software commonly referred the user to seek advice from orthopedic surgeons to improve their chances of a successful outcome.

Assessing Appropriateness for Shoulder Arthroplasty Using a Shared Decision-Making Process

Purpose

The primary purpose of this study was to validate an appropriateness decision-aid tool as a part of engaging patients with glenohumeral arthritis in their surgical management. The associations between the final decision to have surgery and patient characteristics were examined.

Materials and Methods

This was an observational study. The demographics, overall health, patient-specific risk profile, expectations, and health-related quality of life were documented. Visual analog scale and the American Shoulder & Elbow Surgeon (ASES) measured pain and functional disability, respectively. Clinical and imaging examination documented clinical findings and extent of degenerative arthritis and cuff tear arthropathy. Appropriateness for arthroplasty surgery was documented by a 5-item Likert response survey and the final decision was documented as ready, not-ready, and would like to further discuss.

Results

Eighty patients, 38 women (47.5%), mean age: 72(8) participated in the study. The appropriateness decision aid showed excellent discriminate validity (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve value of 0.93) in differentiating between patients who were “ready” and those who were “not-ready” to have surgery. Gender ( P  =  0.037), overall health ( P  =  .024), strength in external rotation ( P  =  .002), pain severity ( P  =  .001), ASES score ( P < .0001), and expectations ( P  =  .024) were contributing factors to the decision to have surgery. Imaging findings did not play a significant role in the final decision to have surgery.

Conclusions

A 5-item tool showed excellent validity in differentiating patients who were ready to have surgery versus those who were not. Patient's gender, expectations, strength, and self-reported outcomes were important factors in reaching the final decision.

Wide-awake local anesthesia for open rotator cuff repair: A case report

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE

Improper treatment of rotator cuff tear might result in progression of tear and deterioration of patient function. The rotator cuff tear can be managed conservatively in most cases however surgical treatment is inevitable in persistent patients.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 45-year-old woman presented to our clinic with shoulder pain and restricted range of motion following a fall from a height three months before the current presentation. Due to the lack of favorable response to conservative treatment and the fact that rotator cuff rupture was traumatic, she became a candidate for rotator cuff repair surgery. Due to financial issues and the patient's refusal of undergoing general anesthesia we considered the WALANT technique. Prior to surgery, we explained the whole procedure to the patient, referring to its pros and cons.

CLINICAL DISCUSSION

The WALANT procedure is a relatively recent technique that has become widespread in orthopedic surgery in the past decade. The advantages of the WALANT technique are that it is simple, feasible, and safe and that the analgesic is adequate during the operation and for the first few hours afterward (5). Concerns with this method include patient discomfort and pain during surgery, which can be managed by educating the patient and minute-by-minute explanation during the procedure.

CONCLUSION

We advocate open rotator cuff repair with the WALANT approach as an effective, cost-saving, safe, simple, and quick alternative to general and regional anesthesia for certain patients or with limited anesthetic resources.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

V.