Patient perceptions after the operative and nonoperative treatment of shoulder instability: A qualitative focus group study.

Background: Little evidence is available regarding patient perceptions of the treatment of shoulder instability. The aim of this study is to investigate patient perceptions regarding the operative and nonoperative treatment of anterior shoulder instability. Methods: Patients who presented to the emergency department or outpatient clinic between 2016 and 2020 were retrospectively selected using diagnosis and procedure codes. Online focus groups and semistructured interviews were conducted, systematically recorded and subsequently transcribed to MaxQDA 2007 for qualitative analysis. Coded transcripts of all focus groups were subjected to a grounded theory-based analysis. Results: Six focus groups and two semistructured interviews were hosted with 35 included patients. The mean age of included patients was 34.1 years (±11.5). Eight patients were female (23%), and 27 patients were male (77%). Fear of (recurrent) dislocation, preoperative counseling, communication between surgeon and physiotherapists and need for a consistent postoperative rehab protocol turned out to be important patient perceptions. The most crucial factor for discontent was a lack of communication from the surgeon. Discussion: This patient-centered focus group study revealed that fear of (recurrent) dislocation, preoperative counseling, communication between surgeons and physiotherapists and the need for a consistent postoperative rehabilitation protocol was the most frequently discussed themes.

The Modified Tampa-Scale of Kinesiophobia for Anterior Shoulder Instability.

Purpose: To assess content validity and to modify the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK) to make it suitable for application in patients with anterior shoulder instability. Methods: A four-round Delphi method was performed to establish expert consensus on developing the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia for patients with anterior shoulder instability (TSK-SI) using an expert group of Dutch shoulder-specialized orthopedic surgeons and physiotherapists. During round 1, experts were asked to score the 17 items of the original TSK on relevance and construction using the COSMIN guidelines. With this feedback, questions were reviewed and modified. During round 2, experts were asked to score the modified items. This process was repeated until consensus was established. Then, patients were asked to participate in a moderator-guided, three-step-test interview using a Web-based platform to assess the modified scale. Sessions were recorded and evaluated by the working group. The modified scale was finally adjusted on the basis of the input of these patients. Results: Thirty Dutch shoulder experts were included, of which 25 completed all 4 rounds, after which consensus was established. One question was added to the modified scale based on feedback in round 1, establishing the 18-item TSK-SI. Sixteen patients with shoulder instability were included, which all completed the three-step test interview. Following this, question 4 (changed to present tense) and question 7 (hypothetical component added) were adjusted, resulting in the final TSK-SI. Conclusions: This consensus modification of the TSK to TSK-SI can support the content validity of the instrument to assess kinesiophobia in patients with anterior shoulder instability. These modifications may improve the responsiveness and validity of the TSK-SI, as it does not match all the items of the original TSK. Level of evidence: Level V, consensus statement.

Why do patients with anterior shoulder instability not return to sport after surgery? A systematic review of 63 studies comprising 3545 patients.

Purpose: To review athletes' reasons not to return to sport (RTS) after surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability, comparing capsulolabral repair and bony reconstruction procedures. The hypothesis is that the most common reason for patients unable to RTS is not due to physical inability of the shoulder. Methods: A systematic review was performed using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. PubMed, Embase/Ovid, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/Wiley, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials/Wiley, SPORTDiscus/Ebsco, and Web of Science/Clarivate Analytics were searched in collaboration with an information specialist up to August 11, 2022. Observational and interventional studies reporting reasons for no RTS following surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability were included. Quality assessment of studies was conducted using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria and Risk of Bias (RoB) assessment. Forest plots were generated to show an overview of the proportion shoulder function independent reasons for each study. Results: Sixty-three studies were included reporting on 3545 athletes, of which 2588 (73%) underwent capsulolabral repair versus 957 (27%) who underwent surgical treatment with bony reconstruction procedures. A total of 650 athletes (18%) were unable to RTS. The reason not to RTS was most frequently shoulder function independent (70%) compared to shoulder function dependent (30%) following both capsulolabral repair and bony reconstruction procedures. Most cited reasons for no RTS after capsulolabral repair were fear of reinjury (17%), personal reasons or change of priorities (11%) and retirement/discharge of military service or sports team (10%). Of these reasons, 106 (22%) were not specified other than being shoulder function dependent or shoulder function independent. Most cited reasons for no RTS after bony reconstruction procedures were fear of reinjury (12%), shoulder pain (10%), and retirement/discharge of military service or sports team (9%). Of these reasons, 74 (44%) were not specified other than being shoulder function dependent or shoulder function independent. Forest plots showed a variation from 0% to 100% shoulder independent reasons for both capsulolabral repair and bony reconstruction procedures. Conclusion: The majority of athletes who did not RTS following surgical treatment for anterior shoulder instability did so due to shoulder function independent reasons, such as fear of reinjury. However, there was a high variety between studies and many reasons were unspecified, warranting unified definitions for reasons of patients that do not RTS.

Prognostic factors associated with failure to return to sport following primary arthroscopic Bankart repair: a retrospective multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Even though many studies have been published regarding return-to-sport (RTS) rates following arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR), evidence regarding prognostic factors for which patients do not RTS is limited. The aim of this study was to identify prognostic factors that are associated with failure to RTS and failure to return to preinjury level of sport (RTPS) following primary ABR. The hypothesis was that prognostic factors for failure to RTS and failure to RTPS would be similar to those predisposing recurrence. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective case-control study including 6 Dutch hospitals was performed. Consecutive patients who underwent primary ABR between 2014 and 2019 were invited to participate and received a questionnaire. Sports participation was assessed before symptom onset, at 6 months postoperatively, and at final follow-up. Failure to RTS was defined as no return to any sport, and failure to RTPS was defined as no return to the same level (or a higher level) of sport. Prognostic factors for failure to RTS or failure to RTPS were identified using logistic regression. Covariates for the regression analysis were selected based on univariate analyses. RESULTS: This study included 318 patients with a mean follow-up period of 4.2 years (standard deviation, 1.8 years). Of these 318 patients, 26 (8.2%) did not RTS and 100 (31%) did not RTPS. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that glenoid bone loss (odds ratio [OR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.15; P = .001) and overhead use of the shoulder during work (OR, 3.77; 95% CI, 1.45-9.85; P = .007) were prognostic factors for failure to RTS. In addition, it showed that preoperative professional sports level (OR, 2.94; 95% CI, 1.07-8.05; P = .04) and preoperative body mass index (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.21; P = .04) were prognostic factors for failure to RTPS. Repair of a bony Bankart lesion (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15-0.81; P = .02) and the presence of an anterior labral periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALPSA) (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20-0.97; P = .04) were identified as factors that facilitated RTPS. CONCLUSION: This study identified glenoid bone loss and overhead use of the shoulder during work to be associated with failure to RTS. Moreover, preoperative sports level and preoperative body mass index were found to be associated with failure to RTPS. In contrast, a bony Bankart lesion and an anterior labral periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALPSA) lesion facilitated RTPS. Future prospective studies are needed to confirm these factors and determine which part of the effect can be attributed to (failure of) surgical treatment or changes in behavior.

"Nearly off-track lesions" or a short distance from the medial edge of the Hill-Sachs lesion to the medial edge of the glenoid track does not seem to be accurate in predicting recurrence after an arthroscopic Bankart repair in a military population: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: On-track lesions with a short distance from the medial edge of the Hill-Sachs lesion to the medial edge of the glenoid track (nearly off-track) may predispose recurrence after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) in the general population. The aim of this study was to determine if a shorter distance between the medial edge of the Hill-Sachs lesion and the medial edge of the glenoid track could accurately predict recurrence after an ABR in a high-demand military population. It was hypothesized that a shorter distance would not accurately predict recurrence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective monocenter case-control study was performed at the Dutch Central Military Hospital. Patients with an on-track Hill-Sachs lesion who underwent a primary ABR between 2014 and 2019 with a minimal follow-up of 2 years and a preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessment received a questionnaire. The primary outcome was recurrence, defined as a complete dislocation or subluxation. Glenoid bone loss was assessed using a linear-based method on MRI. The distance from the medial edge of the Hill-Sachs lesion to the medial edge of the glenoid track was defined as the distance to dislocation (DTD). A receiver operating characteristic curve was created to determine the predictive value of the DTD for recurrence. Logistic regression was used to determine preoperative risk factors that predispose recurrence. Covariates were selected based on univariable analysis and included gender, body mass index, age at surgery and first dislocation, laterality, smoking habits, overhead shoulder activity during work, preoperative dislocations, sports type and level, bony or labral lesions on MRI, and DTD. RESULTS: In total, 80 patients with an average follow-up of 4.8 ± 1.9 years completed the questionnaire and were included in the analyses. Seventeen patients (21%) experienced recurrence at the final follow-up. No difference in DTD was observed among patients who experienced recurrence (9 ± 4 mm) compared with patients who did not (9 ± 5 mm; P = .81). The receiver operating characteristic curve demonstrated no predictive power of DTD for recurrence (area under the curve = 0.49). Smoking at the time of surgery (odds ratio: 3.9; confidence interval: 1.2-12.7; P = .02) and overhead shoulder movement during work (odds ratio: 9.3; confidence interval: 1.1-78.0; P = .04) were associated with recurrence according to the logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSION: A shorter DTD demonstrated no accuracy in predicting recurrence in a military population. Smoking at the time of surgery and overhead shoulder activity during work were associated with recurrence; however, these analyses were underpowered to draw valid conclusions.

Bony reconstruction after failed labral repair is associated with higher recurrence rates compared to primary bony reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 1319 shoulders in studies with a minimum of 2-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: There is uncertainty with regard to the optimal revision procedure after failed labral repair for anterior shoulder instability. An overview of outcomes of these procedures with quantitative analysis is not available in literature. The aim of this review is (1) to compare recurrence rates after revision labral repair (RLR) and revision bony reconstruction (RBR), both following failed labral repair. In addition, (2) recurrence rates after RBR following failed labral repair and primary bony reconstruction (PBR) are compared to determine if a previous failed labral repair influences the outcomes of the bony reconstruction. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies with a minimum follow-up of 2 years and reporting recurrence rates of (1) RBR following failed labral repair and PBR and/or (2) RLR following failed labral repair and RBR following failed labral repair were identified by searching PubMed, Embase/Ovid, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/Wiley, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials/Wiley, and Web of Science/Clarivate Analytics. RESULTS: Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria and comprised 1319 shoulders. Meta-analyses showed that RBR has a significantly higher recurrence rate than PBR (risk ratio [RR] 0.51, P < .008) but found no significant difference in the recurrence rates for RLR and RBR (RR 1.40, P < .49). Also, no significant differences were found between PBR and RBR in return to sport (RR 1.07, P < .41), revision surgery (RR 0.8, P < .44), and complications (RR 0.84, P < .53). Lastly, no significant differences between RLR and RBR for revision surgery (RR 3.33, P < .19) were found. CONCLUSION: The findings of this meta-analyses show that (1) RBR does not demonstrate a significant difference in recurrence rates compared with RLR and that (2) RBR has a significantly higher recurrence rate than PBR.