Minimal clinically important differences in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Simple Shoulder Test, and visual analog scale pain scores after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Autor: Tashjian RZ; Department of Orthopaedics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. Electronic address: Robert.Tashjian@hsc.utah.edu., Shin J; Department of Orthopaedics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA., Broschinsky K; Department of Orthopaedics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA., Yeh CC; Division of Epidemiology, Study Design and Biostatistics Center, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA., Martin B; Department of Orthopaedics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA., Chalmers PN; Department of Orthopaedics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA., Greis PE; Department of Orthopaedics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA., Burks RT; Department of Orthopaedics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA., Zhang Y; Division of Epidemiology, Study Design and Biostatistics Center, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery [J Shoulder Elbow Surg] 2020 Jul; Vol. 29 (7), pp. 1406-1411. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Feb 17.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2019.11.018
Abstrakt: Background: Minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for different patient outcome scores have been reported for various shoulder diseases, including shoulder arthroplasty and the nonoperative treatment of rotator cuff disease. The purpose of this study was to assess the MCID for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) score, the Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and a visual analog scale (VAS) measuring pain, after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.
Methods: A total of 202 patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair were retrospectively reviewed. ASES, SST, and VAS pain scores were collected preoperatively and at 1 year postoperatively. The MCID was then calculated via a 4-question anchor-based method.
Results: The MCID results for the ASES, SST, and VAS pain scores were 27.1, 4.3, and 2.4, respectively. Age at time of surgery, sex, anteroposterior tear size, and worker's compensation status were not associated with MCID values (P > .05).
Conclusion: The MCID values determined in the current study are higher than those previously identified for the nonoperative treatment of rotator cuff disease using the same anchor questions. Use of these higher values should be considered when evaluating improvements of individual patients after rotator cuff repair, to determine comparative effectiveness of various rotator cuff repair techniques and to determine sample sizes for prospective comparative trials of rotator cuff repair methods.
(Copyright © 2019 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: