Cross cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Finnish version of Western Ontario shoulder instability index (WOSI).

BACKGROUND: Western Ontario shoulder instability index (WOSI) is a widely used disease-specific self-assessment measurement tool for patients with shoulder instability. The main aim of this study was to translate and cross culturally adapt the WOSI into Finnish language and to test its measurement properties. METHODS: WOSI was translated in Finnish and adapted into an electronic user interface. 62 male patients with traumatic anteroinferior shoulder instability, programmed for stabilizing shoulder surgery, answered the questionnaire twice preoperatively (2 and 0 weeks), and twice postoperatively (3 and 12 months). Additional scoring tools, such as satisfaction to treatment outcome, subjective shoulder value (SSV), Oxford shoulder instability index (OSIS) and Constant score (CS), were used as comparators. The reliability, validity and responsiveness of WOSI were investigated through statistical analysis. RESULTS: Preoperative test-retest results were available for 49 patients, and 54 patients were available at final follow up. The mean WOSI was 57.8 (SD 20.3), 70.4 (SD 18.9), and 85.9 (SD 15.5), at baseline, 3, and 12 months, respectively. There was a statistically significant mean improvement of 28.8 (SD 24.5) in WOSI between baseline and 12 months (p < 0.0001). The intraclass correlation coefficient for the preoperative WOSI was excellent 0.91. At 12 months WOSI had an excellent Pearson's correlation coefficient both with SSV (0.69), OSIS (-0.81), and poor with CS (0.25) scores, confirming our a priori hypothesis. There were no detected floor nor ceiling effects for WOSI pre- or postoperatively. The calculated minimal detectable change was 9.2 and the estimated minimal clinically important difference 13.4 to 18.1. CONCLUSION: Finnish version of WOSI is a reliable and valid tool for assessing health state and improvement after operative treatment of shoulder instability in young male patients.

Arthroscopic Bankart versus open Latarjet as a primary operative treatment for traumatic anteroinferior instability in young males: a randomised controlled trial with 2-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the success rates of arthroscopic Bankart and open Latarjet procedure in the treatment of traumatic shoulder instability in young males. DESIGN: Multicentre randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Orthopaedic departments in eight public hospitals in Finland. PARTICIPANTS: 122 young males, mean age 21 years (range 16-25 years) with traumatic shoulder anteroinferior instability were randomised. INTERVENTIONS: Arthroscopic Bankart (group B) or open Latarjet (group L) procedure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the reported recurrence of instability, that is, dislocation at 2-year follow-up. The secondary outcome measures included clinical apprehension, sports activity level, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, the pain Visual Analogue Scale, the Oxford Shoulder Instability Score, the Constant Score and the Subjective Shoulder Value scores and the progression of osteoarthritic changes in plain films and MRI. RESULTS: 91 patients were available for analyses at 2-year follow-up (drop-out rate 25%). There were 10 (21%) patients with redislocations in group B and 1 (2%) in group L, p=0.006. One (9%) patient in group B and five (56%) patients in group L returned to their previous top level of competitive sports (p=0.004) at follow-up. There was no statistically significant between group differences in any of the other secondary outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic Bankart operation carries a significant risk for short-term postoperative redislocations compared with open Latarjet operation, in the treatment of traumatic anteroinferior instability in young males. Patients should be counselled accordingly before deciding the surgical treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01998048.

Validation of the low anterior resection syndrome score in finnish patients: preliminary results on quality of life in different lars severity groups.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Low anterior resection syndrome is common after anterior resection for rectal cancer. Its severity can be tested with the low anterior resection syndrome score. We have translated the low anterior resection syndrome score to Finnish, and the aim of this study is to validate the translation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The translated Finnish low anterior resection syndrome score and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality-of-life questionnaire-C30 and QLQ-CR29 questionnaires were sent to 159 surviving patients operated with anterior resection for rectal adenocarcinoma between 2007 and 2014 in a tertiary referral center. Psychometric properties of the translation were evaluated in comparison to quality-of-life scales and in different risk factor groups. RESULTS: In the study, 104 (65%) patients returned the questionnaires. Of these, 56 (54%) had major low anterior resection syndrome, 26 (25%) had minor low anterior resection syndrome, and 22 (21%) had no low anterior resection syndrome. Patients with major low anterior resection syndrome had a significantly lower quality of life and more defecatory symptoms as assessed with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer questionnaires compared with those with no low anterior resection syndrome. Patients operated with total mesorectal excision had significantly higher low anterior resection syndrome scores compared with those operated with partial mesorectal excision (median/interquartile range 32/15 and 29/11, respectively, p = 0.037). The test-retest validity of the translation was good with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.77 (95% confidence interval 0.51-0.90). CONCLUSIONS: The Finnish low anterior resection syndrome score is a valid test in the assessment of postoperative bowel function and its impact on the quality of life. It can be implemented to use during regular follow-up visits of Finnish-speaking rectal cancer patients.

Bankart versus Latarjet operation as a revision procedure after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair.

BACKGROUND: An arthroscopic Bankart operation is the most common operative procedure to treat shoulder instability. In case of recurrence, both Bankart and Latarjet procedures are used as revision procedures. The purpose of this study was to compare the re-recurrence rate of instability and clinical results after arthroscopic revision Bankart and open revision Latarjet procedures following failed primary arthroscopic Bankart operations. METHODS: Consecutive patients operatively treated for shoulder instability at Turku University Hospital between 2002 and 2013 were analyzed. Patients who underwent a primary arthroscopic Bankart operation followed by a recurrence of instability and underwent a subsequent arthroscopic Bankart or open Latarjet revision operation with a minimum of 1 year of follow-up were called in for a follow-up evaluation. The re-recurrence of instability, Subjective Shoulder Value, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability index were assessed. RESULTS: Of 69 patients, 48 (dropout rate, 30%) were available for follow-up. Recurrent instability symptoms occurred in 13 patients (43%) after the revision Bankart procedure and none after the revision Latarjet procedure. A statistically and clinically significant difference in the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability index was found between the patients after the revision Bankart and revision Latarjet operations (68% and 88%, respectively; P = .0166). CONCLUSIONS: The redislocation rate after an arthroscopic revision Bankart operation is high. Furthermore, patient-reported outcomes remain poor after a revision Bankart procedure compared with a revision Latarjet operation. We propose that in cases of recurring instability after a failed primary Bankart operation, an open Latarjet revision should be considered.