Six-month follow-up of functional status in discharged patients with coronavirus disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: The long-term functional outcome of discharged patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unresolved. We aimed to describe a 6-month follow-up of functional status of COVID-19 survivors. METHODS: We reviewed the data of COVID-19 patients who had been consecutively admitted to the Tumor Center of Union Hospital (Wuhan, China) between 15 February and 14 March 2020. We quantified a 6-month functional outcome reflecting symptoms and disability in COVID-19 survivors using a post-COVID-19 functional status scale ranging from 0 to 4 (PCFS). We examined the risk factors for the incomplete functional status defined as a PCFS > 0 at a 6-month follow-up after discharge. RESULTS: We included a total of 95 COVID-19 survivors with a median age of 62 (IQR 53-69) who had a complete functional status (PCFS grade 0) at baseline in this retrospective observational study. At 6-month follow-up, 67 (70.5%) patients had a complete functional outcome (grade 0), 9 (9.5%) had a negligible limited function (grade 1), 12 (12.6%) had a mild limited function (grade 2), 7 (7.4%) had moderate limited function (grade 3). Univariable logistic regression analysis showed a significant association between the onset symptoms of muscle or joint pain and an increased risk of incomplete function (unadjusted OR 4.06, 95% CI 1.33-12.37). This association remained after adjustment for age and admission delay (adjusted OR 3.39, 95% CI 1.06-10.81, p = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: A small proportion of discharged COVID-19 patients may have an incomplete functional outcome at a 6-month follow-up; intervention strategies are required.

Separate double-layer repair versus en masse repair for delaminated rotator cuff tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Delaminated rotator cuff tears are a common shoulder disorder in elderly individuals. Either arthroscopic separate double-layer repair (DR) or en masse repair (ER) is used to treat a delaminated rotator cuff tear. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of arthroscopic ER versus DR intervention. METHODS: Five studies were acquired from PubMed, Medline, Embase, CNKI, Google, and the Cochrane Library. The data were extracted by two of the coauthors independently and were analyzed with RevMan 5.3. Mean differences (MDs), odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess the risk of bias. RESULTS: Five studies, including two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and three observational studies, were assessed. The methodological quality of the trials ranged from low to high. The pooled results for the Shoulder Rating Scale of the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, Constant score, and range of motion (ROM) showed that the outcomes were not statistically significant between the two interventions. The difference in retear rate was not statistically significant (OR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.36-1.33, P = 0.27). The sensitivity analysis proved the stability of the pooled results, and publication bias was not apparent. CONCLUSIONS: Both arthroscopic ER and DR interventions had benefits in delaminated rotator cuff tear treatment. ER and DR treatments were equally effective and had the same retear rate. The arthroscopic DR technique could not be recommended as the optical choice for delaminated rotator cuff tears based on current evidence.