Minimal clinically important differences in Rowe and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index scores after arthroscopic repair of anterior shoulder instability

Park, In; Lee, Sanghyeon; Hyun, Hwan Sub; Lee, Tae Kyoung; Shin, Sang-Jin

doi:10.1016/j.jse.2017.10.032

Cited by 69 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Clinical outcome also was assessed using the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the Rowe score defined respectively as (1) an increase from baseline in overall Rowe of at least 9.7 points. 15 …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

High Variability in Functional Outcomes and Recurrences Between Contact Sports After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Comparative Study of 351 Patients With a Minimum 3-Year Follow-Up

Rossi

Tanoira

Gorodischer

et al. 2020

Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To compare return to sports, functional outcomes, and complications of a consecutive series of contact athletes with anterior glenohumeral instability treated with isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair for isolated anterior instability. Methods Between January 2008 and December 2016, 351 competitive athletes who participated in contact or collision sports underwent isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair at our institution (rugby n = 105, soccer n = 90, martial arts n = 36 boxing n = 28, field hockey n = 30, handball n = 31, and basketball n = 31). Return to sports, the Rowe score, and the Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS) score were used to assess functional outcomes. Complications also were evaluated. Results The mean follow-up period was 66.7 months (range, 36-148 months) and the mean age of the 351 patients was 21.3 years (range, 17-30 years).Overall, 309 patients (88%) were able to return to sports, and 284 (81%) returned at the same level as before the injury. The mean time to return to sports was 5.3 months. The rate of return to sports, the level achieved by the patients, and time to return to sports varied significantly between sports. The Rowe and ASOSS scores showed statistical improvement after operation ( P < .001). The ASOSS score varied significantly between sports ( P < .001). There were 40 recurrences (11.3%), 7 complications (2%) and 21 patients (6%) underwent revision surgery. There was a significant difference in the rate of recurrences and revisions between the different contact sports. Conclusions In athletes with glenohumeral instability who undergo isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair for isolated anterior instability, there is great variability in the rate of return to sport at the same level, in shoulder performance after returning to competition, and in the postoperative recurrence rates. Due to the high variability found in our study, results after arthroscopic Bankart repair in contact athletes should not be reported globally by including the different sports under the “collision or contact sports” label. Level of Evidence Retrospective Case Series; Level of evidence, 4.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

High Variability in Functional Outcomes and Recurrences Between Contact Sports After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Comparative Study of 351 Patients With a Minimum 3-Year Follow-Up

Rossi

Tanoira

Gorodischer

et al. 2020

Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The differences in the ASES and WOSI scores were greater than the reported minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) of 6.4 and 220, respectively. 8,19 The difference in the SANE score approached, but did not reach, the published MCID of 9.5. 30 The total joint literature also consistently shows lower preoperative PRO scores in patients with comorbid back pain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

The Prevalence and Clinical Implications of Comorbid Back Pain in Shoulder Instability: A Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability Cohort Study

Cronin

Wolf

Magnuson

et al. 2020

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Understanding predictors of pain is critical, as recent literature shows that comorbid back pain is an independent risk factor for worse functional and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as well as increased opioid dependence after total joint arthroplasty. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether comorbid back pain would be predictive of pain or self-reported instability symptoms at the time of stabilization surgery. We hypothesized that comorbid back pain will correlate with increased pain at the time of surgery as well as with worse scores on shoulder-related PRO measures. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: As part of the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability cohort, patients consented to participate in pre- and intraoperative data collection. Demographic characteristics, injury history, preoperative PRO scores, and radiologic and intraoperative findings were recorded for patients undergoing surgical shoulder stabilization. Patients were also asked, whether they had any back pain. Results: The study cohort consisted of 1001 patients (81% male; mean age, 24.1 years). Patients with comorbid back pain (158 patients; 15.8%) were significantly older (28.1 vs 23.4 years; P < .001) and were more likely to be female (25.3% vs 17.4%; P = .02) but did not differ in terms of either preoperative imaging or intraoperative findings. Patients with self-reported back pain had significantly worse preoperative pain and shoulder-related PRO scores (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index) ( P < .001), more frequent depression (22.2% vs 8.3%; P < .001), poorer mental health status (worse scores for the RAND 36-Item Health Survey Mental Component Score, Iowa Quick Screen, and Personality Assessment Screener) ( P < .01), and worse preoperative expectations ( P < .01). Conclusion: Despite having similar physical findings, patients with comorbid back pain had more severe preoperative pain and self-reported symptoms of instability as well as more frequent depression and lower mental health scores. The combination of disproportionate shoulder pain, comorbid back pain and mental health conditions, and inferior preoperative expectations may affect not only the patient’s preoperative state but also postoperative pain control and/or postoperative outcomes.

show abstract

“…This value does, however, fall below the recommended minimal clinically important difference (ie, 9.7) for the Rowe score. 28 The review also found external rotation range of motion loss was less in Latarjet procedures compared with Bankart repairs (11.9° vs 20.9°; weighted mean difference=5.75, 95% CI 4.73 to 6.77). 27 However, these data encompassed studies that examined both arthroscopic and open Bankart repairs, as well as studies that examined traditional and variants (ie, Bristow-Latarjet, open Bristow) of the Latarjet procedure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Evaluating the effects of arthroscopic Bankart repair and open Latarjet shoulder stabilisation procedures on shoulder joint neuromechanics and function: a single-centre, parallel-arm trial protocol

Fox

Bonacci

Gill

et al. 2021

BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionShoulder instability injuries are common in sports involving collisions and overhead movements. Arthroscopic Bankart repair and the open Latarjet are two commonly used surgical stabilisation procedures. There is a lack of knowledge surrounding movement strategies, joint loading and muscle strength after each of these procedures. This study will compare: (1) shoulder joint neuromechanics during activities of daily living and an overhead sporting task; (2) shoulder range of motion; (3) shoulder strength; and (4) self-reported shoulder function and health status, between individuals who have undergone an arthroscopic Bankart repair versus open Latarjet.Methods and analysisThis is a prospective cohort, single-centre, non-randomised parallel arm study of surgical interventions for athletic shoulder instability injuries. Thirty participants will be recruited. Of these, 20 will have experienced one or more traumatic shoulder instability injuries requiring surgical stabilisation—and will undergo an arthroscopic Bankart repair or open Latarjet procedure. The remaining 10 participants will have no history of shoulder instability injury and act as controls. Participants will undergo baseline testing and be followed up at 3, 6 and 12 months. A two-way (group×time) analysis of variance with repeated measures on one factor (ie, time) will compare each outcome measure between groups across time points.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the Barwon Health and Deakin University Human Research Ethics Committees. Outcomes will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at relevant scientific conferences.Trial registration numberAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12620000016932).

show abstract

Minimal clinically important differences in Rowe and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index scores after arthroscopic repair of anterior shoulder instability

Cited by 69 publications

References 25 publications

High Variability in Functional Outcomes and Recurrences Between Contact Sports After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Comparative Study of 351 Patients With a Minimum 3-Year Follow-Up

High Variability in Functional Outcomes and Recurrences Between Contact Sports After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Comparative Study of 351 Patients With a Minimum 3-Year Follow-Up

The Prevalence and Clinical Implications of Comorbid Back Pain in Shoulder Instability: A Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability Cohort Study

Evaluating the effects of arthroscopic Bankart repair and open Latarjet shoulder stabilisation procedures on shoulder joint neuromechanics and function: a single-centre, parallel-arm trial protocol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About