Surgeon-Therapist Communication Must Be Improved in Rotator Cuff Repair Rehabilitation: An Electronic Survey of Physical Therapists on Postoperative Rehabilitation Protocols and Communication with Treating Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on postoperative rotator cuff repair protocols in orthopedic or physical therapy literature. Despite surgical management, the frequency of rotator cuff retears continues to be high. OBJECTIVES: This study is designed to investigate the current concepts of postoperative rehabilitation and to evaluate the state of communication between referring surgeons and treating physical therapists. METHODS: A survey was conducted over a 2-year period, performed by an online survey company. RESULTS: Six hundred responses were obtained from physical therapists. Most rehab protocols were based on size of tear, tissue quality, and open versus arthroscopic repair. Current intervention concepts and professional experience guided protocol development. Thirty-three percent of therapists receive operative notes ≤ 25% of the time. Sixteen percent reported not receiving operative notes and not having access to the physician >50% of the time. Most patients were seen within 2 weeks, with passive range of motion started in 83% of cases. Sixty percent started active-assist range of motion at ≤ 4 weeks. Sixty-four percent of therapy was continued for 12 to 16 weeks. Patient compliance, poor tissue quality, and rapid rehab progression were reported as common causes of failure. CONCLUSION: Most rehabilitation programs follow protocols developed by surgeons and physical therapists. Tissue quality, size of tear, and repair type are usually documented in the operative report, and are rarely conveyed to the therapist. This study highlights the lack of communication between the physician and the therapist. Improving communication regarding the findings at surgery, opening lines of communication, and making alterations to the protocol may improve patient outcomes.

Incidence of Metal Hypersensitivity in Orthopedic Surgical Patients Who Self-Report Hypersensitivity History.

INTRODUCTION: Metallic implants are integral to the practice of orthopedic surgery. Delayed-onset T-cell-mediated metal hypersensitivity (diagnosed by patch testing) is reported in 10% to 17% of the general population. Inconclusive evidence exists about the role of metal hypersensitivity in persistently painful or aseptic loosening of arthroplasties. Literature suggests that preoperative patch testing may influence surgical practice. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of metal hypersensitivity in orthopedic surgical patients who self-report hypersensitivity and to characterize which metals are most commonly implicated. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients from a single surgeon's practice was conducted during a 1-year period. All patients were questioned about metal hypersensitivity history; all patients who responded affirmatively were sent for patch testing for specific metals. RESULTS: Only 41 (4.9%) of 840 patients self-reported any metal hypersensitivity. Of these, 34 (83%) were patch-test positive to 1 or more metals. There were 27 whose test results were positive for nickel, 4 each to cobalt or gold thiosulfate, and 1 each to tin or titanium. Seven patients had positive results to multiple metals, all of whom were also nickel hypersensitive. Six patients had metal orthopedic implants before patch testing, and 4 (67%) tested positively to a metal in their implant. CONCLUSION: Metal hypersensitivity can be concerning for treating surgeons and patients. Greater awareness of a history to hypersensitivity may prevent patient exposure to implants containing metals that may cause hypersensitivity. Non-metal-containing or nonreactive metal implants are an option for patients in whom metal hypersensitivity is suspected or confirmed.