A prospective follow-up of patients treated surgically or non-surgically for full-thickness rotator cuff tears

0Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: The objectives of this project are: (1) to compare the efficacy of surgical versus non-surgical management of full-thickness rotator cuff tears, and (2) to detect variables that predict success within each treatment group. Methods: Patients who presented to our care for management of symptomatic full-thickness rotator cuff tears were enrolled in our Shoulder Registry and clinical data were collected prospectively. In addition to baseline demographic information, the following outcome measures were collected at baseline, 6 months, 1 year and annually up to 3 years: Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) Index, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Modified Marx Shoulder Activity Level Scale, VR-12, 100-point Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) rating, 100-point visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and a patient satisfaction scale. All patients were allocated treatment as recommended by the attending surgeon. We described all patient demographic characteristics, and performed linear and logistic regression for variables associated with treatment allocation and with treatment effects. We also used Student’ t-tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests where appropriate, to explore differences in treatment effects between the groups for all outcome measures at all time points. Results: A total of 292 patients were included with 155 allocated to surgery and 137 to non-surgical treatment. Those allocated to surgery were younger (58.6 years vs 65.2 years; P

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gagnier, J. J., Oltean, H. N., Bedi, A., Carpenter, J. E., & Miller, B. S. (2013, September 1). A prospective follow-up of patients treated surgically or non-surgically for full-thickness rotator cuff tears. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967113S00100

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free