Measure what matters: Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score as the critical measure for shoulder outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of a system anchored in patient outcomes is challenged to gain widespread adoption required to demonstrate the value of care provided for shoulder conditions. This is in large part because of the administrative burden created by current tools and clinical implementation barriers that limit practical use and therefore leave most clinicians, administrators, payers, and patients without a measure of what matters most: Are patients improving? Thus, we must ask ourselves, How do we accurately and efficiently measure and report quality of care in a simple, reliable, and easily communicated manner? We propose that the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score is the best solution to measure patient improvement and can be used universally for all shoulder conditions. The measure is simple, valid, reliable, and sensitive to change and has the lowest implementation barrier compared with all other outcome measures. METHODS: We synthesized the available literature (11 studies) that demonstrates strong psychometrics comparable to legacy measures across >4000 patients with a wide range of shoulder conditions. RESULTS: SANE scores range from 40% to 60% at baseline for most patients before treatment and range from 75% to 85% at 1 year after therapy depending on the condition, similar to legacy scores such as the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score. Additionally, the SANE score shows similar baseline and post-care measures across conditions that can be used to guide clinical care. This finding shows that the observed baseline and improvement scores can provide valuable patient assessment and can be used in aggregate for quality improvement and other value-based purposes. CONCLUSION: We strongly recommend the SANE score as the primary patient outcome measure for patients with all shoulder conditions, given the value of measuring every patient's progress and growing pressure to quantify patient outcomes.

Assessment of glenoid baseplate initial micromotion and fixation strength in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty designs using a direct shear force methodology.

Background: In a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, the altered glenohumeral joint center of rotation subjects the glenoid baseplate to increased shear forces and potential loosening. Methods: This study examined glenoid baseplate micromotion and initial fixation strength with the application of direct shear force in a Sawbone model. The reverse total shoulder arthroplasty systems examined were the DJO Reverse® Shoulder Prosthesis, the Exactech Equinoxe® Reverse System, and the Tornier AequalisTM Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis. Specimens were cyclically tested with increasing shear loads until 150 µm of displacement between the implant and glenoid was achieved, and subsequently until failure, classified as either 1 cm of implant/glenoid displacement or fracture. Results: The average load withstood for the 150 µm threshold for DJO, Tornier, and Exactech was 460 ± 88 N, 525 ± 100 N, and 585 ± 160 N, respectively. The average total load at device failure for DJO, Tornier, and Exactech was 980 ± 260 N, 1260 ± 120 N, and 1350 ± 230 N, respectively. Discussion: The Exactech implant design trended toward requiring more load to induce micromotion at each threshold and to induce device failure, most commonly seen as inferior screw pull out. This study proposes design features that may enhance fixation and suggests little risk of initial micromotion or failure during initial post-operative recovery.

Professional Pitchers Display Differences in UCL Morphology and Elbow Gapping During Moving Valgus Stress Testing After UCL Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstruction (UCLR) of the elbow has received much attention given the rise in incidence among baseball pitchers. Stress ultrasonography has been demonstrated to be a critical evaluation tool of the UCL. No study has dynamically evaluated the ability of UCLR to restore normal kinematics. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to compare ulnohumeral gapping during a moving valgus stress test as well as UCL thickness between professional pitchers with and without UCLR. We hypothesized that the ulnohumeral joint will display greater gapping and the UCL graft will be thicker in pitchers after UCLR compared with uninjured pitchers. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Ultrasonography was used to measure the medial ulnohumeral joint distance and the UCL thickness of 70 asymptomatic professional baseball pitchers; 6 of the participants had a history of UCLR. Images were captured of the dominant (D) and nondominant (ND) elbows at the maximal cocking position under 2 loaded conditions within the moving valgus stress test arc: (1) gravity stress and (2) 2.5 kg (5.5 lb) of valgus force using a dynamometer. Intra- and interrater reliability of the measurements was established with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Separate mixed-model analyses of variance (D side × UCL) were used to compare the D and ND elbow variables between pitchers with and without a history of UCLR. RESULTS: All measurements displayed good reliability according to ICCs. Pitchers with a history of UCLR demonstrated less gapping (5.6 ± 2.9 vs 4.2 ± 1.2 mm; P = .002) and greater UCL graft thickness (0.17 ± 0.07 vs 0.11 ± 0.08 mm; P = .03) compared with the native ligament in pitchers without prior UCL injury. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrated that the UCLR results in a thicker, stiffer construct with less medial elbow gapping than the anatomical UCL. Using ultrasound to evaluate the UCL was a reliable, efficient, and clinically feasible method to assess UCL thickness and joint gapping in players with a history of UCLR. Future studies may consider this approach to evaluate surgical techniques and graft types for UCLR.

Infraspinatus or teres minor fatty infiltration does not influence patient outcomes after reverse shoulder arthroplasty with a lateralized glenoid.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies show that reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) may improve forward elevation (FE) but external rotation may remain impaired with substantial teres minor fatty infiltration. The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of fatty infiltration on postoperative range of motion (ROM) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after RSA with a more lateralized center of rotation. METHODS: About 69 patients (average age 69 years; 44 women, 25 men) with preoperative MRI, 1-year postoperative ROM, 2-year Veteran's Rand Survey, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons subjective form, and Single Alpha-Numeric Evaluation scores who underwent RSA with a lateralized glenoid component between 2010 and 2014 were identified. Patients with Fuchs stage 3 fatty degeneration were compared with patients with Fuchs stage ≤ 2 using a one-way ANOVA. RESULTS: Eleven patients had Fuchs stage 3 in the teres minor and 28 with stage 3 in the infraspinatus. Charlson comorbidity indices, Veteran's Rand Survey scores, age, and BMI were not different between groups. There were no differences after one year (follow-up = 15 ± 14 months) in FE (FE = 128 ± 29) or external rotation (33 ± 13) between groups. There were no differences in two-year minimum (follow-up = 42.9 ± 17.9 months) American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores between degenerated teres minor (76.4 ± 20) or infraspinatus (69.1 ± 24) groups. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to assess the influence of teres minor and infraspinatus fatty infiltration on the postoperative ROM and PROs with a more lateralized glenoid RSA implant. Our results show that in a more lateralized RSA, neither teres minor nor infraspinatus fatty infiltration appear to negatively influence ROM or PROs.

Current concepts in the evolution of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair has become one of the most common and successful surgeries performed in orthopedics. It represents the culmination of advances in many diverse fields such as optics, fluid dynamics, mechanical engineering, and most recently, orthobiologics. This article reviews the current state of the art of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, through the lens of its historical context and evolution to our present understanding. We review the limitations in the current approach, and glance toward the future of rotator cuff regeneration with emerging technologies.

Does Functional Bracing of the Unstable Shoulder Improve Return to Play in Scholastic Athletes? Returning the Unstable Shoulder to Play.

BACKGROUND: Functional bracing is often used as an adjunct to nonoperative treatment of anterior shoulder instability, but no study has evaluated the effectiveness of in-season bracing. The purpose of this study was to examine successful return to play in a nonoperative cohort of adolescent athletes with in-season shoulder instability and compare those athletes treated with bracing to those who were not. HYPOTHESIS: The use of functional bracing will improve success rates in a cohort of athletes treated nonoperatively for in-season shoulder instability. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3. METHODS: A total of 97 athletes with anterior shoulder instability were followed for a minimum of 1 year. The mean age was 15.8 ± 1.4 years (range, 12.0-18.0 years). All athletes were treated with initial nonoperative management. Twenty athletes (21%) were also treated with bracing while 77 (79%) were not. The athlete completing the current season and 1 subsequent season without surgery or time lost from shoulder injury was defined as a successful outcome. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference in nonoperative success rates between the braced and nonbraced athletes (P = 0.33). Braced athletes (n = 20) returned to play 80% of the time, while nonbraced athletes (n = 77) returned at a rate of 88%. Of the braced athletes, 85% were football players (n = 17). A football-only comparison demonstrated no difference between braced failures (26%) and nonbraced failures (16%) (P = 0.47). CONCLUSION: This is the first study to evaluate the utility of functional bracing in returning an athlete to sport and completing a full subsequent season without surgery or time loss due to injury of the shoulder. In adolescent athletes with shoulder instability treated nonoperatively, functional bracing did not result in increased success rates when compared with no bracing. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The data from this study indicate that functional bracing may not improve success rates for athletes with shoulder instability.

The Nonoperative Instability Severity Index Score (NISIS): A Simple Tool to Guide Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment of the Unstable Shoulder.

BACKGROUND: The management of the adolescent athlete after initial shoulder instability remains controversial. HYPOTHESIS: Individual risk factors in athletes with shoulder instability who are managed nonoperatively can be integrated into a scoring system that can predict successful return to sport. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4. METHODS: A total of 57 scholastic athletes with primary anterior shoulder instability who were managed nonoperatively were reviewed. Success was defined as a return to index sport at the same level and playing at least 1 subsequent season without missed time as a result of the shoulder. Patient-specific risk factors were individually evaluated, and odds ratios were calculated. A 10-point Nonoperative Injury Severity Index Score (NISIS) incorporated the risk factors for failure. This score was then retrospectively applied with regression analysis and a chi-square analysis to determine the overall optimal score that predicted failure of nonoperative management. RESULTS: In total, 6 risk factors for failure were included in the NISIS: age (>15 years), bone loss, type of instability, type of sport (contact vs noncontact), male sex, and arm dominance. Overall, 79% of patients treated nonoperatively were able to successfully return to sport. Nearly all (97%) low-risk patients (NISIS <7) successfully returned to sport, while only 59% of high-risk patients returned to sport, a relative risk of 12.2 (P = 0.001). High-risk patients with unipolar bone loss successfully returned (100%), but 67% of high-risk patients with bipolar bone loss failed. CONCLUSION: The NISIS is a simple and effective clinical tool to determine successful nonoperative management following anterior shoulder instability and may be helpful in guiding decision making when presented with the unstable shoulder in the scholastic athlete.

The influence of radiographic markers of biomechanical variables on outcomes in reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in regard to variability in the center of rotation (COR), which modifies the superior-inferior position of the humerus to affect the acromiohumeral interval (AHI), and its effect on the deltoid lever arm (DLA), acromial index (AI), and critical shoulder angle (CSA). The purpose of this study was to investigate the variation in biomechanics and the association with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and range of motion (ROM) measurements. METHODS: Radiographs, ROM, and 2-year PRO scores were retrospectively reviewed for 108 patients. RESULTS: There was large variability in preoperative and postoperative biomechanics. The COR was medialized 12.01 ± 4.8 mm. The CSA increased 2.64° ± 12.45°. The AHI increased 20.6 ± 9.80 mm. The DLA lengthened 21.21 ± 10.15 mm. The AI increased 0.009 ± 0.3. Postoperative AI positively correlated with American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and Penn Shoulder Score (P = .03). Specifically, a postoperative AI of 0.62 corresponded to American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (72.5 ± 18.3 vs. 62.3 ± 24.7; P = .02) and Penn Shoulder Score (71.2 ± 21.4 vs. 61.8 ± 25.6; P = .05), an average 10 points higher than AI of <0.6. Also, a smaller postoperative CSA (<25°) correlated with improved forward elevation (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study that evaluates the variability of biomechanical factors and their impact on postoperative ROM and PROs. An increased AI and decreased CSA are associated with improved PROs in this study, and a smaller CSA is associated with better forward elevation. Change in the COR, AHI, or DLA, however, did not affect patient outcomes or ROM. Further study is warranted to determine the optimal position.

Return to Sport as an Outcome Measure for Shoulder Instability: Surprising Findings in Nonoperative Management in a High School Athlete Population.

BACKGROUND: Young age and contact sports have been postulated as risk factors for anterior shoulder instability. Management after shoulder instability is controversial, with studies suggesting that nonoperative management increases the risk of recurrence. Several studies examined return to play after an in-season instability episode, and few followed these patients to determine if they were able to successfully compete in a subsequent season. No study has evaluated this question in a high school athlete population. PURPOSE: To compare the likelihood of return to scholastic sport and complete the next full season without an additional time-loss injury among athletes with anterior shoulder instability in terms of treatment, instability type, and sport classification. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: Athletes were included in this study as identified by a scholastic athletic trainer as experiencing a traumatic time-loss anterior shoulder instability injury related to school-sponsored participation. The cohort was predominantly male (n = 108, 84%) and consisted mostly of contact athletes (n = 101, 78%). All athletes had dislocation or subluxation diagnosed by a board-certified physician who determined the athlete's course of care (nonoperative vs operative). Successful treatment was defined as completion of care and return to the athlete's index sport, with full participation for the following season. Chi-square and relative risk analyses were completed to compare success of treatment (nonoperative vs operative care) and instability type. Separate logistic regressions were used to compare the effect of sex and sport classification on the athletes' ability to return to sport. Statistical significance was set a priori as α = .05. RESULTS: Scholastic athletes (N = 129) received nonoperative (n = 97) or operative (n = 32) care. Nonoperatively treated (85%) and operatively treated (72%) athletes successfully returned to the same sport without injury for at least 1 full season ( P = .11). Players sustaining a dislocation were significantly more likely to fail to return when compared with those sustaining a subluxation (26% vs 89%, P = .013). Sex ( P = .85) and sport classification ( P = .74) did not influence the athlete's ability to return to sport, regardless of treatment type. CONCLUSION: A high percentage of athletes with shoulder instability achieved successful return to sport without missing any additional time for shoulder injury. Those with subluxations were at almost 3 times the odds of a successful return compared with those sustaining a dislocation.

Management of Three- and Four-Part Proximal Humerus Fractures.

The management of three- and four-part proximal humerus fractures remains controversial because the literature has supported all forms of management, including nonsurgical management, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), and shoulder arthroplasty. Specific patient factors ultimately influence the decision of which treatment best fits the patient and the fracture. Surgeons should understand the rationale for nonsurgical and surgical management of these fractures, including ORIF and reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Comparison of Surgeon Performance of Rotator Cuff Repair: Risk Adjustment Toward a More Accurate Performance Measure.

BACKGROUND: Movement toward a value-based health-care system necessitates the development of performance measures to compare physicians, hospitals, and health-care systems. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a potential metric. However, valid use of PROs hinges on the ability to risk-adjust for baseline patient differences across a surgeon's panel of patients. The purpose of this study was to propose an approach for baseline risk adjustment and evaluate the importance of risk adjustment when comparing surgeons' performance of rotator cuff repair. METHODS: Patients (n = 995) treated with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair by 34 surgeons from 2010 to 2017 were identified from a large sports medicine clinical data registry. A linear regression model was used to adjust for baseline PROs, patient demographics, and clinical characteristics to predict American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) change scores for each surgeon. A risk-adjusted performance measure was calculated as the difference between the average unadjusted ASES change scores and the risk-adjusted predicted ASES change scores across all patients treated by a surgeon. RESULTS: The differences between unadjusted and risk-adjusted performance scores varied widely across surgeons (range, -13.8 to 10.3 ASES points). Use of the risk-adjusted performance scores resulted in a dramatic change in the relative ranking of surgeons, compared with the ranking based on the observed ASES change scores, with 31 of the 34 surgeons' rank changing following risk adjustment. On average, the observed ASES scores improved from 49.5 ± 17.5 at baseline to 78.0 ± 22.5 at 6 months across all surgeons. In the risk-adjustment model (R = 0.44), male sex, Workers' Compensation status, higher scores on the Veterans RAND 12-item Health Survey (VR-12), lower baseline ASES scores, fair and poor tendon quality, and night pain all had a significant effect on the predicted ASES change scores (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show wide variation of nearly 25 points in the risk-adjusted 6-month ASES performance difference from the highest to the lowest-performing surgeons. Additionally, 91% of surgeons' rank changed following risk adjustment. This suggests that performance measurement that does not account for baseline patient characteristics would likely result in incorrect conclusions about a surgeon's relative performance based on PROs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Subscapularis Repair Is Unnecessary After Lateralized Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists as to whether the subscapularis should be repaired after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the utility of repairing the subscapularis after reverse shoulder arthroplasty with regard to complications, objective findings, and patient-reported outcome measures. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records for 99 patients who had undergone a lateralized reverse shoulder arthroplasty with (n = 58) or without (n = 41) subscapularis repair. Outcomes were compared with the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Penn shoulder score (PSS), Veterans RAND (VR)-12, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score at a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Demographics, range of motion, and complications were also compared. A 1-way analysis of variance was performed to determine differences in performance and outcome scores, and a chi-square analysis was performed to compare the frequency of complications between groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the repair and no-repair groups in terms of SANE, PSS, ASES, or VR-12 scores. There also were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of postoperative ranges of forward elevation (128° versus 123°; p = 0.44) and external rotation (33° versus 29°; p = 0.29), the dislocation rate (5% versus 2%; p = 0.49), or the overall complication rate (9% versus 5%; p = 0.47). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study suggest that repair of the subscapularis tendon after lateralized reverse shoulder arthroplasty may not be necessary. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Validity and Responsiveness of the Single Alpha-numeric Evaluation for Shoulder Patients.

BACKGROUND: There is an ever-increasing demand for widespread implementation of patient-reported outcomes. However, adoption is slow owing to limitations in clinical infrastructure and resources within busy orthopaedic practices. Prior studies showed the single alpha-numeric evaluation (SANE) score to correlate at a single point in time with the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score. However, no study has validated the SANE in terms of test-retest reliability, responsiveness, or clinical utility. PURPOSE: To validate SANE with the ASES across a sample of patients with common orthopaedic shoulder diagnoses. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: Patients undergoing rotator cuff repair (n = 77), total shoulder replacement (n = 55), or physical therapy (n = 80) for signs and symptoms of subacromial impingement syndrome (n = 61) or adhesive capsulitis (n = 19) were administered the SANE and ASES at baseline and again at their 3-month follow-up from initial care or surgery (N = 212, mean ± SD age = 52.6 ± 1.2 years, n = 145 women). Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC2,1) and standard error of the measurement (SEm) were used to evaluate the test-retest reliability of the SANE and the validity between the SANE and ASES scores. Analysis of variance (treatment group × time) was used to evaluate the responsiveness to treatment, and a receiver operating characteristic curve was used to establish the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the SANE as compared with the ASES (α = .05). Floor and ceiling effects were evaluated as the percentage of patients who scored the highest or lowest score on each tool. RESULTS: The SANE demonstrated good pretreatment reliability (ICC2,1 = 0.84, SEM = 3.8), similar to the ASES (ICC2,1 = 0.82, SEM = 3.4). The SANE also showed good agreement with the ASES before and after treatment across all treatment groups (rotator cuff repair, ICC2,1 = 0.85, SEM = 3.4; total shoulder replacement, ICC2,1 = 0.72, SEM = 5.2; physical therapy: ICC2,1 = 0.82, SEM = 2.9). The SANE and ASES displayed similar responsiveness after treatment, with similar mean change and SD within each treatment group. The receiver operating characteristic curve revealed an area under the curve of 0.79 (SE, 0.62; P < .001) and a cutoff of 15% on the SANE, with a sensitivity of 85% to establish the MCID. Acceptable and similar floor and ceiling effects were observed for the ASES (4%) and SANE (9%). CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates that the SANE is valid for a range of common shoulder diagnoses to assess patient outcomes across operative and nonoperative treatment for shoulder complaints. The MCID of 15% is similar to that of the ASES (11%), suggesting that the SANE is a simple and efficient tool to assess treatment effects for shoulder disorders. Future studies are warranted to confirm these results and compare across other body parts and diagnoses.

Outcomes of Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty with B2 Glenoids: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Total shoulder arthroplasty remains an effective procedure for shoulder pain relief. Despite the negative effect of abnormal glenoid morphology and specifically retroverted and posteriorly subluxated glenoids, there is no consensus for management of B2 glenoids in total shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes and complication rates for B2 glenoid techniques so as to provide a baseline understanding of the current state of treatment of this pathology. METHODS: A systematic review evaluating outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty with biconcave glenoids using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology included searches up to December 31, 2015, of PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Reviews, and Google Scholar. Nine articles met inclusion and exclusion criteria. RESULTS: In this study, 239 total shoulder arthroplasties with B2 glenoids with a mean follow-up of 55.5 months (range, 24 to 91 months) were included. The mean patient age was 63.3 years (range, 55.8 to 68.7 years). Asymmetric reaming was performed in 127 glenoids, posterior bone-grafting was included in 53 glenoids, and 34 received an augmented glenoid component to correct glenoid retroversion and bone loss. Overall, the mean Constant and Neer scores improved from preoperative measures. Fifty-eight percent of patients had no loosening, and 42% had some loosening, although not all of these patients were symptomatic. Despite variation in outcome measures hindering treatment approach comparison, the posteriorly augmented glenoid was generally reported to provide better outcomes with few complications. Although posterior glenoid bone-grafting results in acceptable outcomes, it also represents the highest rate of complications. The revision rate was 15.6% for asymmetric reaming, 9.5% for posterior glenoid bone-grafting, and 0% for posteriorly augmented glenoids. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment of the B2 glenoid remains a challenge to the shoulder surgeon, with worse outcomes and higher complication rates. Longer follow-up, consistent outcome measures, and result stratification based on glenoid type may allow for direct comparison in the future. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Preventing infection in shoulder surgery.

Although rare, infection after shoulder surgery can represent a devastating complication. Infection can negatively affect clinical outcomes, and eradication often requires a protracted treatment course. Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, and Cutibacterium acnes are among the most frequently isolated pathogens. Perioperative measures can be implemented to reduce infection risk. Here we review various perioperative practices and their efficacy at reducing infection after shoulder surgery.

Shoulder arthroplasty in the US Medicare population: a 1-year evaluation of surgical complications, hospital admissions, and revision surgery.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to describe patients receiving each shoulder arthroplasty procedure and to assess surgical complications, hospital admissions for surgical complications, and surgical revisions among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: Medicare patients receiving shoulder arthroplasty in the United States in 2011 were identified from Medicare administrative data and classified by surgery type: shoulder hemiarthroplasty (HA), anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), or reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Surgical complications, hospital admissions, and revisions were identified during the year after the index arthroplasty procedure. RESULTS: There were 24,441 patients who met all inclusion criteria, and of those, 20.0% received HA, 42.5% received TSA, and 37.4% received RSA. Compared with RSA and TSA recipients, HA recipients tended to be older and sicker and were more likely to be Medicaid eligible. The rate of new surgical complications and related hospital admissions was greatest during the first 50 days after surgery but remained significant and stable throughout the remainder of the year. Rates of complications and related hospital admissions were greatest for HA recipients (17.4% and 6.6%, respectively), followed by RSA (14.2% and 5.1%) and TSA (9.4% and 4.0%). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of adverse surgical outcomes after shoulder arthroplasty differed across populations that received HA, TSA, and RSA and across patients within each group by comorbidity burden. The finding that the rate of surgical complications and related hospital admissions remained meaningful during the entire year after surgery suggests that a postoperative follow-up period longer than the traditional 90 days may be warranted.

Selection, implementation, and interpretation of patient-centered shoulder and elbow outcomes.

The movement toward a value-based health care market requires comparison of physicians, hospitals, and health systems. Traditionally, process-based measures such as infection and readmission rates have been used. However, these events are uncommon in shoulder and elbow surgery, thus limiting their utility. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a promising measure of quality and have been proposed as a potential metric to compare surgeon performance. However, there are over 25 different PROs for shoulder and elbow conditions. Therefore, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Value Committee was established to recommend shoulder and elbow PROs in an effort to align their implementation for quality assessment. The committee developed criteria for assessing the outcome measures including that each measure should be patient reported, not requiring clinician input; have published validation and psychometrics; and be standardized and demonstrate ease of use for the patient and clinician. Two sets were suggested: one set for clinical implementation and a more robust set for research purposes. The final recommendation was that all patients should complete the Veterans Rand 12 for general health and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation for the specified body region. For patients with shoulder complaints, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was recommended, and for those with elbow complaints, the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score was recommended. More robust disease-specific measures were provided for research purposes. Continued efforts should be made to align these measures across orthopedics to facilitate use of patient outcome measures as a component of value-based health care assessment.

Outcomes for subscapularis management techniques in shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review aims to synthesize published data for the most common subscapularis takedown and repair to compare outcomes in the setting of shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: Searches of MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases identified studies that reported clinical or radiologic outcomes for subscapularis management in the setting of shoulder arthroplasty. Comparisons included musculotendinous integrity, subscapularis testing and strength, shoulder range of motion, and functional outcome scores. RESULTS: The 14 included studies reported considerable variability in techniques, outcomes, and musculotendinous integrity. Lesser tuberosity osteotomy (LTO) demonstrated better healing rates (93.1%) than subscapularis peel (SP; 84.1%) and midsubstance tenotomy (ST; 75.7%), although not significantly different. A statistically significant increase in fatty infiltration was found after surgery across techniques, and range of motion and strength were similar. Mean rates of normal results for belly-press and lift-off tests were uniformly better for LTO (79.1% and 80.7%) over ST (66.7% and 65.6%), although multiple studies showed poor correlation between subscapularis functional testing and musculotendinous integrity. Mean total Constant and Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index outcome scores were slightly better for LTO (77.6, 84.2) than for SP (71.8 and 82.7). Mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores favored the ST group (80.8) over the SP (79.1) and LTO (73) groups. CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest no significant differences exist for postoperative musculotendinous integrity or clinical outcomes among the subscapularis management techniques in shoulder arthroplasty. Subscapularis healing and integrity appear to favor the lesser tuberosity takedown method. Additional randomized controlled comparisons with long-term follow-up are needed to more effectively compare these surgical approaches.