Long-term survival of GSB III elbow prostheses and risk factors for revisions.

INTRODUCTION: Although replacement of the elbow joint is a complex procedure there is not much clinical evidence that contributes to surgical decision-making, mainly due to small clinical samples and short follow-up. Therefore, we performed a long-term analysis up to 30 years after implantation of a GSB III total elbow prosthesis to quantify long-term outcome and to identify possible risk factors for implant revision. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who received a primary GSB III total elbow prosthesis between 1978 and 1998 were included. Information about patient characteristics, the latest known implant status and possible risk factors were collected, Kaplan-Meier survival curves plotted, and 10- and 20-year survival calculated. The cohort was stratified for known risk factors such as diagnosis, age, or gender and included in a Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 253 patients [mean age at operation 56.9 years (range from 17.5 to 84 years)] with 293 GSB III prostheses were included. The median follow-up was 9.1 years (0 months to 29.3 years). Whereas 81 prostheses did not need revision during the observation period, 76 had been implanted in patients who died before any revision was required, and 75 had not been revised by the last known follow-up. 61 prostheses were revised. This corresponds to a 10-year survival rate of 0.8 (95 % CI 0.74-0.85) and a 20-year rate of 0.67 (95 % CI 0.57-0.76). Prostheses in patients with post-traumatic conditions survived significantly shorter than those in patients with rheumatoid arthritis; previous operations lead to a 2.8 times greater risk of revision (p = 0.004). Neither age at implantation nor gender had a significant influence on prosthesis survival. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate a good long-term prognosis for this design. The prognosis has to be adjusted for the underlying disease. Previous operations such as joint reconstruction significantly increase the risk of revision.

Responsiveness of five outcome measurement instruments in total elbow arthroplasty.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify and compare the sensitivity to change of 5 outcome instruments for the elbow joint. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study (n = 65), outcome was measured by the Short Form 36 (SF-36), the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH), the modified American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons questionnaire for the elbow, patient part (pmASES) and examiner/clinical part (cmASES), and the Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation form (PREE). Responsiveness was quantified by the effect size (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM) before and 6 months after total elbow arthroplasty. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine the instruments' ability to classify effects into global health change assessment categories. RESULTS: For the total scores, the ES were 1.50 for the PREE, 1.32 for the pmASES, 0.86 for the cmASES, 0.56 for the DASH, and 0.11 for the SF-36 (P ≤ 0.002 for all differences, except the cmASES and DASH). The same order was found within the subdomains of pain/symptoms and function and remained consistent when using the SRM and in ROC curve analysis. PREE total (area under the ROC curve 0.68), DASH function, and pmASES total and pain (area under the ROC curve range 0.64-0.67) discriminated best between "much better" and the other categories. CONCLUSION: The PREE was the most responsive instrument and can be recommended for every set of measures for elbow joint disorders. The pmASES was slightly less responsive but is a valid alternative. The examiner-assessed cmASES is affected by concerns regarding validity and was relatively less responsive. The DASH for comprehensive measurement of the entire upper extremity and the SF-36 for chronic pain conditions complete the assessment set.

Sports activity after anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Implant functionality has clearly increased over the past decades because of improvements in total shoulder arthroplasty systems. This means that prostheses are now being implanted in younger patients with high sports activity. HYPOTHESIS: The implantation of the total shoulder arthroplasty does not mainly influence the sports activity. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients with unilateral total shoulder arthroplasty, followed for at least 1 year, were included in the study. Assessment preoperatively and 1 year and 2 years after operation included clinical examination and a validated questionnaire (Constant, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index [SPADI], and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] scores, and the Short Form 36 [SF-36]). In addition, all patients received a sports questionnaire developed in house. RESULTS: Of the 55 patients who took part in sports before having shoulder disease, 49 (89%) were still able to participate after a mean follow-up of 2.8 years (range, 1.3-4.6 years). Seventeen patients had given up sports before total shoulder arthroplasty; 11 of them resumed activities after joint replacement but 6 did not start again. No patient had to stop sports because of the total shoulder arthroplasty. The sports most commonly mentioned were swimming (10 patients [20.4%]), golf (8 patients [16.3%]), cycling (8 patients [16.3%]), and fitness training (8 patients [16.3%]). Strength and range of motion, as well as the physical component summary (PCS) of the SF-36 and the Constant score (CS) after total shoulder arthroplasty, were significantly better in the sports group (49 of 100; PCS = 46, CS = 77) than in the nonsports group (45 of 100; PCS = 41,CS = 71). Eighteen patients (36.7%) stated that even after joint replacement, they still suffered restrictions on their sports activities because of shoulder problems. Whereas the overall mean age at follow-up was 68.9 years (range, 26-92 years), the mean age of patients participating in sports was significantly lower than in the nonsports group (63 vs 70 years; P = .002). CONCLUSION: Total shoulder arthroplasty allows patients to participate in sports without significant restriction of their level of activity. The probability of being able to do sports postoperatively-if done preoperatively-is high. Long-term studies are needed to determine whether the greater loading on the joint will lead to more rapid wear and a higher rate of loosening with time.

Prediction of grip and key pinch strength in 978 healthy subjects.

BACKGROUND: Hand strength is an important independent surrogate parameter to assess outcome and risk of morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to determine the predictive power of cofactors and to predict population-based normative grip and pinch strength. METHODS: A representative population survey was used as the basis for prediction analyses (n = 978). Bivariate relationships between grip/pinch strengths of the dominate hand were explored by means of all relevant mathematical functions to maximize prediction. The resulting best functions were combined into a multivariate regression. RESULTS: Polynoms (up to the third degree) were the best predictive functions. On the bivariate level, height was best correlated to grip (46.2% explained variance) and pinch strength (37.7% explained variance) in a linear relationship, followed by sex, age, weight, and occupational demand on the hand. Multivariate regression provided predicted values close to the empirical ones explaining 76.6% of the variance for grip strength and 67.7% for pinch strength. CONCLUSION: The five easy-to-measure cofactors sex, age, body height, categorized occupational demand on the hand, and body weight provide a highly accurate prediction of normative grip and pinch strength.

How sharp is the short QuickDASH? A refined content and validity analysis of the short form of the disabilities of the shoulder, arm and hand questionnaire in the strata of symptoms and function and specific joint conditions.

PURPOSE: To assess and compare content, validity, and specificity of the QuickDASH (Disability of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire) as compared to the full-length DASH and other instruments to give a recommendation for its use depending on a specific clinical situation. METHODS: Data of three large cohorts of patients with shoulder (n = 138), elbow (n = 79), and carpo-metacarpal I (n = 103) arthroplasties were analyzed. The item content of both instruments was compared within the subdomains function and symptoms. Scores and correlations to other instruments were compared in all strata to assess construct convergence. Specificity was quantified and compared using receiver operating characteristics curves (ROC) and effect sizes (in shoulder only). RESULTS: The QuickDASH underestimates symptoms (e.g., 71.1 vs. DASH 66.1 in elbow, 100 = no symptoms, P < 0.001) but overestimates disability (e.g., 72.8 vs. DASH 78.5 in wrist, 100 = full function, P < 0.001). It does not measure the same content as the DASH although the total score levels of both instruments are similar. Furthermore, the QuickDASH is less specific than the DASH in the subdomains, especially in symptoms: for example, area under ROC 0.65 vs. DASH 0.68 in elbow (P = 0.015); effect size in shoulder 1.42 vs. DASH 1.65 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The short QuickDASH can be recommended for a summary assessment of arm symptoms and function based on the total score in the daily clinical rush. For differentiated assessment of symptoms and function, e.g. for clinical studies, the full-length DASH provides more specific and sophisticated results.

Reliability and validity of the German version of "the Patient-rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE)" as an outcome measure of wrist pain and disability in patients with acute distal radius fractures.

The aim was to test the reliability and validity of the German version of the Patient-rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) for patients with acute distal radius fractures. To estimate the reliability and construct validity, 44 patients completed a questionnaire booklet containing the German PRWE, the Short Form-36 (SF-36), and the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) four to six weeks after the fracture, and the PRWE again seven days later. For reliability, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.94 for the PRWE total score. Its internal consistency was 0.89 (Cronbach's alpha). The PRWE total score showed a moderate correlation with the DASH (0.62) and the SF-36 subscale bodily pain (0.58). Low correlations were found with other scales of the SF-36. Based on our results the German PRWE is a practical, reliable, and valid instrument and can be recommended to measure patient-rated pain and disability in German-speaking patients with acute distal radius fracture.

Usefulness of concomitant biceps tenodesis in total shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study.

The purpose of this report is to assess the association of concomitant biceps tenodesis in total shoulder arthroplasty with treatment success 1 year after total shoulder arthroplasty. Of 136 consecutive shoulders (124 patients) undergoing primary total shoulder arthroplasty between 2003 and 2006, 54 (39.7%) underwent biceps tenodesis. For each patient, we obtained potential preoperative confounding data, such as age; gender; presence of rheumatoid arthritis; Short Form 36; number of previous shoulder operations; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score; Shoulder Pain and Disability Index score; and insurance status. At the 1-year follow-up, we calculated the Constant score of all patients (ranging from 0 [worst] to 100 [best]). We first determined the crude association of concomitant biceps tenodesis with 1-year treatment success (Constant score > or =80) and then fitted a multivariate model correcting for potential confounders to assess the adjusted association of the biceps tenodesis on treatment success. The total number of treatment successes was 46 of 136 shoulders (33.8% of all prosthesis implantations). The crude association (odds ratio) of a concomitant biceps tenodesis with treatment success was 2.38 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15 to 4.93; P = .02). When adjusting for potential confounders, we found that this association slightly increased to 2.97 (95% CI 1.00 to 8.85; P = .05). Concomitant biceps tenodesis appears to have a favorable effect on 1-year treatment success after total shoulder arthroplasty.

Arthroscopic and open options for surgical treatment of chondromatosis of the elbow.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the treatment-specific outcome of surgical therapy of chondromatosis of the elbow with special attention on the complication and recurrence rate as well as induction of secondary osteoarthritis. METHODS: A consecutive patient group from 1989 to 2003 was evaluated retrospectively and followed up clinically and radiologically. Special attention was paid to locking and catching, swelling, pain, loose bodies, and signs of osteoarthritis. In the case of a causal pathology, mostly osteoarthritis, the condition was classified as secondary; otherwise, it was classified as primary. The following scores were calculated: modified American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons questionnaire for elbows; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire; and Short Form 36. RESULTS: Of 24 patients operated on, 19 (79%) were followed up after 56 months (range, 11 to 177 months). Of these, 10 were primary types and 9 secondary types. The extension deficit of 12 degrees preoperatively decreased to -9 degrees , and pain was significantly (P = .001) reduced. Postoperatively, 1 patient still reported occasional locking and 1 patient had swelling. In both patients no loose bodies could be identified by radiography. Comparison of the arthroscopic and open techniques showed a trend toward a shorter rehabilitation time of 2.4 months after arthroscopic intervention, in contrast to 4.6 months for an open procedure, and a trend toward higher patient satisfaction after arthroscopy. Comparison of the primary and secondary forms showed significantly (P = .042) better pain reduction for primary chondromatosis. Of the patients with distinct preoperative osteoarthritis, 44% showed ongoing osteophytic growth; there were no cases of new osteoarthritis. CONCLUSIONS: Both open and arthroscopic approaches give satisfactory results with a trend toward shorter rehabilitation and higher patient satisfaction for the arthroscopic approach. Osteoarthritis is not induced and there is no danger of recurrence in the medium term. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic, retrospective comparative study.

Responsiveness of six outcome assessment instruments in total shoulder arthroplasty.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the responsiveness (sensitivity to change) of 6 shoulder outcome instruments. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study of 153 total shoulder arthroplasties, outcome was measured by the Short Form 36 (SF-36); Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH); Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI); American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons questionnaire for the shoulder (ASES); and the Constant (Murley) Score (CS). Responsiveness was mainly quantified by effect sizes before and 6 months after operation. Sensitivity analysis of the effects by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves was performed to determine the instruments' ability to classify effects into global health change assessment categories. RESULTS: Effect sizes of the self-assessment total scores were 0.71, 1.19, 2.10, and 2.13 for the SF-36, DASH, SPADI, and ASES, respectively. The clinical ASES and the CS had effect sizes of 1.87 and 2.23, respectively. The SPADI (effect size 2.12) and the CS (effect size 2.72) were most responsive for pain. For functioning, the patient ASES (effect size 2.10), the CS (effect size 1.82), and the clinical ASES (effect size 1.85) were almost equal. The SF-36 bodily pain scale and most scores of the condition-specific instruments showed a significant area under the ROC of up to 0.77. CONCLUSION: The SPADI and/or the CS are the most suitable for short, responsive, shoulder-specific assessment. The more expensive patient ASES can be used for most responsive shoulder-function assessment. For a comprehensive measurement of health and quality of life, the DASH and/or the SF-36 should be added to the set.

Lessons learned during the cross-cultural adaptation of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder form into German.

Cross-cultural adaptation and testing of reliability and validity were performed by use of a sample of 118 patients after shoulder arthroplasty. They completed a questionnaire booklet containing the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) questionnaire, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), Short Form 36, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, and 1 week later, they completed the ASES questionnaire again. The cross-cultural adaptation procedure revealed no major problems. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for the subscales for pain and function and for the total score were very high (>0.84); the ICC for the subscale instability was unacceptably low. Function of the contralateral side was consistently better for all items (P < .01). Reliability for both function scales was similar (ICC >0). The ASES scores showed moderate correlation of 0.57 to 0.67 with the various scales of the SF-36 and higher correlation with the DASH (0.84) and SPADI (0.92). The German ASES showed good reliability and validity and can be used for shoulder-specific patient self-assessment in comparison to the contralateral (unaffected) side and provides additional information to objective parameters. The instability domain does not provide any additional clinical information.