The COVID-19 pandemic and follow-up for shoulder surgery: The impact of a shift toward telemedicine on validated patient-reported outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: The emergence of COVID-19 and its ensuing restrictions on in-person healthcare has resulted in a sudden shift towards the utilization of telemedicine. The purpose of this study is to assess patient satisfaction and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for individuals who underwent follow-up for shoulder surgery using telemedicine compared to those who received traditional in-person clinic follow-up. METHODS: Patients who underwent either rotator cuff repair or total shoulder arthroplasty during a designated pre-COVID-19 (traditional clinic follow-up) or peri-COVID-19 (telemedicine follow-up) span of time were identified. PROMs including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons standardized assessment form, the three-level version of the EQ-5D form, the 12-Item Short Form survey, and a modified version of a published telemedicine survey were administered to participants six months post-operatively via phone call. RESULTS: Sixty patients agreed to participate. There was no significant difference between the pre-COVID-19 and peri-COVID-19 groups in patient satisfaction with their follow-up visit (p = 0.289), nor was there a significant difference in PROMs between the two groups. In total, 83.33% of the telemedicine group and 70.37% of the in-person clinic group preferred traditional in-person follow-up over telemedicine. DISCUSSION: In a cohort of patients who underwent telemedicine follow-up for shoulder surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic, there was no difference in patient satisfaction and PROMs compared to traditional in-person clinic follow-up. This study indicates that while the majority of participants preferred face-to-face visits, patients were relatively satisfied with their care and had similar functional outcome scores in both groups, despite the large disruption in healthcare logistics caused by COVID-19.

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 (ß = 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.

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.