Establishing minimal clinically important difference for the UCLA and ASES scores after rotator cuff repair.

BACKGROUND/HYPOTHESIS: Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is a vital tool in the analysis of clinical results. It allows the determination of clinical relevance of statistical data. Our hypothesis was that specific differences between preoperative and postoperative scores would be able to accurately predict patient perception of improvement and satisfaction as reflected by anchor and distribution-based questions. METHODS: Retrospective cohort with patients that underwent rotator cuff repair. We evaluated the University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Rating Scale (UCLA) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Assessment Form (ASES) before and 12-months after surgery. Anchor-based, distribution-based and minimum detectable change (MDC) approaches were utilized. RESULTS: We evaluated 289 shoulders. The MCID for the UCLA scale was 4.5 points using the anchor method, 2.5 by the distribution method and 3.6 by MDC. Patients with a baseline score>20 presented a lower MCID (1.5, 1.1 and 1.7, respectively). For the ASES score, the MCID was 6.1 by the anchor method, 10.5 based on the distribution method and 26.3 by MDC. In the group of patients above the 60 point cutoff, the obtained values were 2.4, 4.9 and 13.6, respectively. CONCLUSION: The mean MCID value for the UCLA shoulder score is 3.5 points, ranging from 2.5 points (distribution method) to 4.5 points (anchor method). The mean MCID value for the ASES score was 15.2 points, ranging from 6.1 (anchor method) to 26.3 (MDC). Patients groups presenting with higher preoperative scores showed lower MCID values. This fact needs to be considered in postoperative comparisons between treatment groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Basic Science Study, Validation of Outcomes Instruments/Classification Systems.

Isokinetic evaluation of the shoulder and elbow after Latarjet procedure.

BACKGROUND/HYPOTHESIS: The Latarjet procedure changes the anatomy of the shoulder, moving the coracoid process distally through an incision in the subscapularis muscle. Some authors have studied the effect of this surgery on shoulder rotator strength. Our hypothesis is that the Latarjet procedure decreases elbow supination and flexion strength. METHODS: A retrospective case series, evaluating patients submitted to the Latarjet procedure between May 2013 and June 2017. Movements of the elbow (supination, pronation, flexion and extension) and shoulder (internal and external rotation) were evaluated bilaterally using a Biodex System 3 isokinetic dynamometer (Biodex Medical Systems, New York) in concentric/concentric mode. RESULTS: We evaluated 20 patients with an average follow-up of 36 months. In the elbow, we observed a 9.1% decrease in supination strength at a speed of 60°/s (p=0.044), without statistical difference at 120°/s (p=0.570). In the shoulder, there was a 13.5% decrease in external rotation strength at 60°/s and 4.5% at 180°/s (p=0.009 and p=0.040, respectively). The other movements did not demonstrate any statistically significant differences. CONCLUSION: After the Latarjet procedure, the supination strength at 60°/s was decreased, as was the external rotation strength of the shoulder at 60°/s and 180°/s. We did not observe any reduction in strength for shoulder flexion or internal shoulder rotation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, case series.

Randomized trial for the treatment of post-traumatic elbow stiffness: surgical release vs. rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: There are no previous randomized trials comparing surgical to conservative treatment for post-traumatic elbow stiffness. The aim of our study was to compare elbow range of motion (ROM) and clinical outcomes among patients undergoing surgical treatment or a standardized rehabilitation for post-traumatic elbow stiffness. METHODS: Randomized clinical trial of patients with post-traumatic elbow stiffness for more than 6 months who failed conventional physical therapy for 4 months. Patients were randomized into 2 treatment groups. The conservative group underwent the rehabilitation protocol associated with the use of orthoses (static progressive for extension and dynamic for flexion) and continuous passive motion. The surgical group underwent surgical release by a posterior approach without triceps detachment, followed by a rehabilitation protocol similar to the conservative group. The primary outcome of the study was flexion-extension ROM at 6 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the visual analog scale for pain, the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score, absolute and relative increase in flexion-extension ROM, and complication rates. RESULTS: Thirty patients were analyzed in the study, 15 in each group. The mean elbow flexion-extension ROM at the end of 6 months of follow-up was 108° in the surgical group and 88° in the conservative group (P = .002). The mean absolute and the relative increase of elbow flexion-extension at 6 months were, respectively, 17° and 27% in the conservative group and 41° and 59% in the surgical group (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Surgical elbow release associated with the rehabilitation protocol resulted in a greater flexion-extension ROM, as well as a greater absolute and relative increase compared with rehabilitation alone at 6 months of follow-up. The groups did not differ regarding clinical scores and complication rates.

Intraobserver and interobserver agreement in the classification and treatment of proximal humeral fractures.

BACKGROUND: There is controversy surrounding the reliability of radiographic measurements and existing classifications for proximal humeral fractures. METHODS: Ten orthopedists, divided into 2 groups by length of experience, evaluated radiographs in 3 views from 40 proximal humeral fractures. We evaluated 11 radiographic criteria (including the Neer and pathomorphologic classifications, head-shaft angle, displacement of the humeral shaft, and lesser and greater tuberosities) and treatment indication. We also analyzed the criteria that most influenced the choice of treatment. RESULTS: Interobserver reliability was substantial for the presence of fracture of the greater tuberosity (κ = 0.749) and medial metaphyseal comminution (κ = 0.627) and moderate for the pathomorphologic classification (κ = 0.504), displacement of the greater tuberosity (κ = 0.422), and treatment decision (κ = 0.565). Intraobserver reliability was substantial for treatment indication (κ = 0.620) and presence of displacement of the fracture of the greater tuberosity (κ = 0.627 and 0.611) and moderate for the Neer (κ = 0.490) and pathomorphologic (κ = 0.607) classifications. The results were influenced by the observer's experience. The surgical indication was influenced by the pathomorphologic classification in 50% of the evaluators (odds ratio, 4.85; range, 3.30-8.65). CONCLUSION: The pathomorphologic classification has higher reliability than the Neer classification and was the factor that most influenced the surgical decision. The determination of the presence of fracture and displacement of the greater tuberosity and medial metaphyseal comminution is reliable with the use of simple radiographs, and the results were influenced by the observer's experience.