RESUMEN

Background: In 2020, the American Society of Shoulder and Elbow Therapists (ASSET) published an evidence-based consensus statement outlining postoperative rehabilitation guidelines following anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Purpose: The purpose of this study was to (1) quantify the variability in online anatomic TSA rehabilitation protocols, and (2) assess their congruence with the ASSET consensus guidelines. Methods: This study was a cross-sectional investigation of publicly available, online rehabilitation protocols for anatomic TSA. A web-based search was conducted in April 2022 of publicly available rehabilitation protocols for TSA. Each collected protocol was independently reviewed by two authors to identify recommendations regarding immobilization, initiation, and progression of passive (PROM) and active range of motion (AROM), as well as the initiation and progression of strengthening and post-operative exercises and activities. The time to initiation of various components of rehabilitation was recorded as the time at which the activity or motion threshold was permitted by the protocol. Comparisons between ASSET start dates and mean start dates from included protocols were performed. Results: Of the 191 academic institutions included, 46 (24.08%) had publicly available protocols online, and a total of 91 unique protocols were included in the final analysis. There were large variations seen among included protocols for the duration and type of immobilization post-operatively, as well as for the initiation of early stretching, PROM, AROM, resistance exercises, and return to sport. Of the 37 recommendations reported by both the ASSET and included protocols, 31 (83.78%) were found to be significantly different between groups (p\<0.05). Conclusion: Considerable variability was found among online post-operative protocols for TSA with substantial deviation from the ASSET guidelines. These findings highlight the lack of standardization in rehabilitation protocols following anatomic TSA. Level of Evidence: 3b.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: While multiple studies have tested the ability of large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, to pass standardized medical exams at different levels of training, LLMs have never been tested on surgical sub-specialty examinations, such as the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Maintenance of Certification (MOC). The purpose of this study was to compare results of ChatGPT 3.5, GPT-4, and fellowship-trained surgeons on the 2023 ASES MOC self-assessment exam. METHODS: ChatGPT 3.5 and GPT-4 were subjected to the same set of text-only questions from the ASES MOC exam, and GPT-4 was additionally subjected to image-based MOC exam questions. Question responses from both models were compared against the correct answers. Performance of both models was compared to corresponding average human performance on the same question subsets. One sided proportional z-test were utilized to analyze data. RESULTS: Humans performed significantly better than Chat GPT 3.5 on exclusively text-based questions (76.4% vs. 60.8%, P = .044). Humans also performed significantly better than GPT 4 on image-based questions (73.9% vs. 53.2%, P = .019). There was no significant difference between humans and GPT 4 in text-based questions (76.4% vs. 66.7%, P = .136). Accounting for all questions, humans significantly outperformed GPT-4 (75.3% vs. 60.2%, P = .012). GPT-4 did not perform statistically significantly betterer than ChatGPT 3.5 on text-only questions (66.7% vs. 60.8%, P = .268). DISCUSSION: Although human performance was overall superior, ChatGPT demonstrated the capacity to analyze orthopedic information and answer specialty-specific questions on the ASES MOC exam for both text and image-based questions. With continued advancements in deep learning, LLMs may someday rival exam performance of fellowship-trained surgeons.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: Although interest in studies evaluating the outcomes of rotator cuff repair is steadily increasing, the results and tendon integrity after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in elderly patients have only been minimally investigated. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and repair integrity in patients over 65 years of age who underwent arthroscopic repair of full-thickness rotator cuff tears. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted with the following inclusion criteria: (1) elective shoulder arthroscopy for rotator cuff repair for full-thickness posterosuperior tears; (2) age over 65 years at surgery; and (3) participation in 24 months of follow-up. Preoperatively, the range of motion (ROM) and the Constant-Murley Score (CMS) and at follow-up, the ROM, the 12-Item Short Form Survey, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, and the CMS were evaluated; an ultrasonographic assessment of tendon integrity was performed according to the adapted Sugaya classification. Results: The final sample consisted of 110 patients with an average age of 69.2 ± 3.5 years. The mean duration of nonoperative management before surgery was 2.6 ± 0.8 months. The mean period of preoperative physical therapy was 0.6 ± 0.9 months. ROM and CMS showed statistically significant improvement (all P < .001) after a mean follow-up time of 54.5 ± 22.3 months. The ultrasonographic assessment showed tendon integrity (types I and II) in 75% of cases; 21% were type III repair, and rotator cuff retear (types IV and V) was recorded in 4% of cases. All scores directly correlated with the integrity of the tendon. In the multivariate analysis, higher postoperative CMS was associated with male sex (P < .001, ß = -6.085) and lower age (P = .004, ß = -0.533). Higher postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons were associated with lower age (P = .020, ß = -0.414). Higher postoperative 12-Item Short Form Survey physical component score and mental component score were associated with lower age (P = .013, ß = -0.550 and P < .001, ß = -0.520, respectively) and shorter preoperative physical therapy period (P = .013, ß = -2.075 and P = .006, ß = -1.093, respectively). Conclusion: A significant ROM and CMS recovery and a rotator cuff integrity rate of 75% can be expected in patients over 65 years of age who undergo arthroscopic repair for full-thickness rotator cuff tears. Better functional, physical, and mental health outcomes correlate with rotator cuff integrity and are predicted by male sex and a shorter period of preoperative physical therapy.

RESUMEN

Machine learning (ML) has not yet been used to identify factors predictive for post-operative functional outcomes following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR). We propose a novel algorithm to predict ARCR outcomes using machine learning. This is a retrospective cohort study from a prospectively collected database. Data were collected from the Surgical Outcome System Global Registry (Arthrex, Naples, FL, USA). Pre-operative and 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month post-operative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores were collected and used to develop a ML model. Pre-operative factors including demography, comorbidities, cuff tear, tissue quality, and fixation implants were fed to the ML model. The algorithm then produced an expected post-operative ASES score for each patient. The ML-produced scores were compared to actual scores using standard test-train machine learning principles. Overall, 631 patients who underwent shoulder arthroscopy from January 2011 to March 2020 met inclusion criteria for final analysis. A substantial number of the test dataset predictions using the XGBoost algorithm were within the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) thresholds: 67% of the 12-month post-operative predictions were within MCID, while 84% were within SCB. Pre-operative ASES score, pre-operative pain score, body mass index (BMI), age, and tendon quality were the most important features in predicting patient recovery as identified using Shapley additive explanations (SHAP). In conclusion, the proposed novel machine learning algorithm can use pre-operative factors to predict post-operative ASES scores accurately. This can further supplement pre-operative counselling, planning, and resource allocation. Level of Evidence: III.

RESUMEN

AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare the characteristics and outcomes of L-shaped and reverse L-shaped rotator cuff tears. METHODS: A total of 82 shoulders (81 patients) after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair were retrospectively enrolled. The mean age of the patients was 62 years (SD 6), 33 shoulders (40.2%) were in male patients, and 57 shoulders (69.5%) were the right shoulder. Of these, 36 shoulders had an L-shaped tear (group L) and 46 had a reverse L-shaped tear (group RL). Both groups were compared regarding characteristics, pre- and postoperative pain, and functional outcomes. Muscle status was assessed by preoperative MRI, and re-tear rates by postoperative ultrasonography or MRI. RESULTS: Patients in group RL were significantly older than in group L (p = 0.008), and group RL was significantly associated with female sex (odds ratio 2.5 (95% confidence interval 1.03 to 6.32); p = 0.041). Mean postoperative pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score was significantly greater (group L = 0.8 (SD 1.5), group RL = 1.7 (SD 2.2); p = 0.033) and mean postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score was significantly lower in group RL than group L (group L = 91.4 (SD 13.1), group RL = 83.8 (SD 17.9); p = 0.028). However, postoperative mean VAS for pain and ASES score were not lower than the patient-acceptable symptom state scores. Mean retracted tear length was significantly larger in group L (group L = 24.6 mm (SD 6.5), group RL = 20.0 mm (SD 6.8); p = 0.003). Overall re-tear rate for 82 tears was 11.0% (nine shoulders), and re-tear rates in group L and RL were similar at 11.1% (four shoulders) and 10.9% (five shoulders), respectively (p = 1.000). No significant intergroup difference was found for fatty degeneration (FD) or muscle atrophy. Within group L, postoperative FD grades of supraspinatus and subscapularis worsened significantly (p = 0.034 and p = 0.008, respectively). Mean postoperative pain VAS (male = 1.2 (SD 1.8), female = 1.3 (SD 2.0)) and ASES scores (male = 88.7 (SD 15.5), female = 86.0 (SD 16.8)) were similar in male and female patients (p = 0.700 and p = 0.475, respectively). Regression analysis showed age was not a prognostic factor of postoperative pain VAS or ASES scores (p = 0.188 and p = 0.150, respectively). CONCLUSION: Older age and female sex were associated with reverse L-shaped tears. Although the postoperative functional outcomes of patients with reverse L-shaped tears were satisfactory, the clinical scores were poorer than those of patients with L-shaped tears. Surgeons should be aware of the differences in clinical outcome between L-shaped and reverse L-shaped rotator cuff tears. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(3):394-400.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIMS: It is important to understand the rate of complications associated with the increasing burden of revision shoulder arthroplasty. Currently, this has not been well quantified. This review aims to address that deficiency with a focus on complication and reoperation rates, shoulder outcome scores, and comparison of anatomical and reverse prostheses when used in revision surgery. METHODS: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) systematic review was performed to identify clinical data for patients undergoing revision shoulder arthroplasty. Data were extracted from the literature and pooled for analysis. Complication and reoperation rates were analyzed using a meta-analysis of proportion, and continuous variables underwent comparative subgroup analysis. RESULTS: A total of 112 studies (5,379 shoulders) were eligible for inclusion, although complete clinical data was not ubiquitous. Indications for revision included component loosening 20% (601/3,041), instability 19% (577/3,041), rotator cuff failure 17% (528/3,041), and infection 16% (490/3,041). Intraoperative complication and postoperative complication and reoperation rates were 8% (230/2,915), 22% (825/3,843), and 13% (584/3,843) respectively. Intraoperative and postoperative complications included iatrogenic humeral fractures (91/230, 40%) and instability (215/825, 26%). Revision to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), rather than revision to anatomical TSA from any index prosthesis, resulted in lower complication rates and superior Constant scores, although there was no difference in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores. CONCLUSION: Satisfactory improvement in patient-reported outcome measures are reported following revision shoulder arthroplasty; however, revision surgery is associated with high complication rates and better outcomes may be evident following revision to reverse TSA. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(8):618-630.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There has been increasing recognition of the importance for standardized postoperative rehabilitation protocols. Despite published guidelines in 2016 by the American Society of Shoulder and Elbow Therapists (ASSET), optimal postoperative rehabilitation after rotator cuff repair (RCR) remains an area of active academic debate. The goals of this study were (1) to assess the variability of RCR rehabilitation protocols published online, (2) to study the congruence between online RCR rehabilitation protocols and the ASSET consensus statement, and (3) to identify differences in online RCR rehabilitation protocols from before and after 2016. METHODS: A web-based search was conducted for publicly available RCR rehabilitation protocols from websites of all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) academic orthopedic institutions. A supplemental 10-page Google search was also performed with the search terms "rotator cuff repair rehabilitation protocol." Collected protocols were grouped by tear size (small/medium or large/massive) and examined for information relating to the following categories: protocol demographics, adjunctive therapy use, immobilization/range of motion, and strengthening. Findings were compared to the ASSET statement's recommendations. Protocols published before and after ASSET's 2016 publication were compared for differences. RESULTS: A total of 66 online RCR rehabilitation protocols were collected. Only 16 of 187 (8.5%) ACGME institutions provided online RCR rehabilitation protocols. The collected protocols recommend more aggressive rehabilitation in comparison to ASSET, specifically regarding immobilization time, passive range of motion initiation, active assisted range of motion initiation, and strengthening initiation (P < .001). Protocols published after 2016 trended toward more conservative recommendations in comparison to protocols published before 2016. Regardless of this trend, the majority of these recommendations were still largely more aggressive than ASSET's recommendations. CONCLUSION: Despite an attempt by ASSET to provide standardization, this study highlights the marked variations that still exist regarding RCR rehabilitation. Additionally, online RCR rehabilitation protocols tend to make more aggressive recommendations than the ASSET consensus statement. Further research is needed to address these variations and to either validate, alter, or reject the ASSET recommendations.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Although the achievement of adequate analgesia is critical to patient comfort and recovery following orthopedic procedures, no standard protocol exists to dictate the appropriate duration and quantity of narcotic prescription in the postoperative period. Therefore, the purpose of this survey was to determine patterns of opioid prescribing among orthopedic shoulder and elbow providers. METHODS: In March 2020, a survey was distributed through a LISTSERV to 989 members of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons orthopedic society. Survey recipients were asked to describe their personal and practice characteristics. Additionally, they were asked to list their 3 most commonly performed procedures and, for each operation, to list which narcotic pain medication they most commonly prescribe postoperatively, along with the corresponding number of tablets typically given. Similarly, respondents were asked to record frequently recommended alternative strategies for postoperative pain control, factors influencing the respondents' prescribing practices, and methods of patient counseling regarding opioid use and disposal. RESULTS: A total of 177 providers responded to the survey. Across all selected procedures, Percocet (5 mg of oxycodone hydrochloride and 325 mg of acetaminophen) was the most commonly prescribed drug, with 21-30 tablets being the most commonly prescribed amount. The majority of surgeons (82%) indicated that previous opioid prescriptions influence their decision to prescribe opioids. Respondents most frequently reported patient age (48%) and duration of the patient's symptoms (32%) as additional influential factors. Most surgeons (93%) reported counseling their patients regarding the use of opioid medications. However, only 30% of surgeons reported providing information regarding how to dispose of unused opioids. In lieu of opioids, nearly all investigators reported the use of ice as a pain-relief strategy, with rest and the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs reported as other commonly recommended alternatives. Of 137 respondents who were aware of prescription guidelines, 21% reported using recommendations from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 21% used institutional policies, and 20% used personal guidelines, whereas the remaining respondents used other literature findings in their prescription decisions. Of particular concern, 21% of overall respondents were unaware of any type of guidelines. DISCUSSION: To prevent both misuse and abuse of opioid prescribing, this analysis serves as a starting point for the establishment of more consistent, evidence-based opioid prescription guidelines for surgical procedures on the shoulder and elbow. In addition to recommending safe, procedure-specific opioid dosages and standardizing pain management strategies, these guidelines should include effective methods of educating both providers and patients regarding the use of opioid medication.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Clavicular hook plate application is one of the most commonly used treatment methods for acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocation, although it may cause multiple postoperative complications. We modified the regularly used 0° hook plate to 15° and compared the clinical outcomes of these two hook plates for treatment of AC joint dislocation. METHODS: Forty-three patients with acute AC joint dislocation were randomly enrolled (0° hook plate, 20 patients; 15° hook plate, 23 patients). The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and visual analog scale for pain (VASP) scores were evaluated preoperatively and at 3 days and 1, 2, 3, and 6 months postoperatively and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Compared with the preoperative scores, the 6-month postoperative ASES score gradually increased but the VASP score decreased in both groups. Furthermore, the ASES and VASP scores were significantly different between the two groups at every postoperative time point. CONCLUSION: The 15° hook plate is superior to the 0° hook plate in reducing shoulder pain and improving postoperative recovery in the treatment of AC joint dislocation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III; Treatment study (retrospective comparative study).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score and the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC) are frequently used measures in clinical research for patients with rotator cuff tears (RCTs). The minimally important differences (MIDs) for these measures have not been established in patients with RCTs. The purpose of this study was to establish the MIDs for patients with known RCTs treated both surgically or nonsurgically. METHODS: We included 222 subjects with full-thickness RCTs. The WORC and ASES were collected at baseline and at 4, 8, 16, 32, 48, and 64 weeks, as was an end of study form with questions about change in the condition after treatment. We calculated anchor-based and distribution-based MIDs. We used regression modeling to determine change in MIDs as predicted by several variables. RESULTS: For the anchor-based method, we found an MID of 21.9 for the ASES and -282.6 for the WORC. When using the distribution-based method of ½ and ⅓ the standard deviation, we arrived at an MID of 26.9 and 17.9 points for the ASES and -588.7 and -392.5 points for the WORC. No variables predicted MID changes. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to report MIDs for the ASES and WORC in a population of patients with only full-thickness RCTs. This information will directly improve our ability to determine when patients with RCTs are changing in a meaningful manner and accurately power clinical studies using these outcome measures.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Several questionnaires have been used to evaluate shoulder disability after neck dissection. The purpose of this study was to review these measures and highlight their strengths and weaknesses. METHODS: A literature review was performed to identify measures of shoulder disability after head and neck cancer surgery. These measures were evaluated in terms of their methods of development and assessment of their psychometric properties. RESULTS: Seven questionnaires were identified. Several of the other questionnaires have been well developed but have not had their psychometric properties assessed in the head and neck cancer population. Each questionnaire has its strengths and weaknesses. CONCLUSION: The strengths and weaknesses of the shoulder disability questionnaires should be considered when deciding which questionnaire to use. Efforts should be focused on using well-designed questionnaires that have been assessed in this patient population rather than developing or using other questionnaires.

Asunto(s)