RESUMEN
Background: The management of frozen shoulder (FS) differs depending on experience level and variation between scientific guidelines and actual practice. Purpose: To determine the current trends and practices in the management of FS among shoulder specialists and compare them with senior shoulder specialists. Study Design: Consensus statement. Methods: A team of 15 senior shoulder specialists (faculty group) prepared a questionnaire comprising 26 questions regarding the definition, terminology, clinical signs, investigations, management, and prognosis of FS. The questionnaire was mailed to all the registered shoulder specialists of Shoulder and Elbow Society, India (SESI) (specialist group; n = 230), as well as to the faculty group (n = 15). The responses of the 2 groups were compared, and levels of consensus were determined: strong (>75%), broad (60%-74.9%), inconclusive (40%-59.9%), or disagreement (<40%). Result: Overall, 142 of the 230 participants in the specialist group and all 15 participants in the faculty group responded to the survey. Both groups strongly agreed that plain radiographs are required to rule out a secondary cause of FS, routine magnetic resonance imaging is not indicated to confirm FS, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs should be administered at bedtime, steroid injection (triamcinolone or methylprednisolone) is the next best option if analgesics fail to provide pain relief, passive physical therapy should be avoided in the freezing phase, <10% of patients would require any surgical intervention, and patients with diabetes and thyroid dysfunction tend to fare poorly. There was broad agreement that routine thyroid dysfunction screening is unnecessary for women, a single 40-mg steroid injection via intra-articular route is preferred, and arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) results in a better outcome than manipulation under anesthesia (MUA). Agreement was inconclusive regarding the use of combined random blood sugar (RBS) and glycosylated hemoglobin versus lone RBS to screen for diabetes in patients with FS, preference of ACR versus MUA to treat resistant FS, and the timing of surgical intervention. There was disagreement over the most appropriate term for FS, the preferred physical therapy modality for pain relief, the most important movement restriction for early diagnosis of FS, and complications seen after MUA. Conclusion: This survey summarized the trend in prevalent practices regarding FS among the shoulder specialists and senior shoulder surgeons of SESI.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The number of anchors and modality of fixation to be used has been a point of debate in the arthroscopic management of rotator cuff repair. Southern California Orthopedic Institute (SCOI) technique has shown better anatomical healing of tendons using single-row anchors. In this study, we evaluated the functional outcomes of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using the SCOI technique, in Indian population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty two patients (16 males and 16 females) were included in the study, and underwent an arthroscopic repair of small-to-medium-sized rotator cuff tear, at a single institution, for 12 months. Postoperatively, patients were evaluated using UCLA score and Constant-Murley score, and range of motion was analyzed and documented using photographs. RESULTS: Mean age was 57.06 years, and the most common cause of cuff tear was a traumatic degeneration. Mean UCLA score improved from preoperative 8.75 to postoperative 31.79, at 12 months, with the P < 0.001. Similarly, mean Constant-Murley score improved from preoperative 20.66 to postoperative 81.31, at 12 months, with P < 0.001. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the SCOI single-row technique proves to be a good and effective modality of treatment in the arthroscopic management of small-to-medium-sized rotator cuff tears. In Indian population, considering cost-effectiveness, single-row repair of rotator cuff tears using SCOI technique can be an interesting option in its management.