Quantifying success after total shoulder arthroplasty: the minimal clinically important difference

Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 2018, Pages 298-305

  Simovitch, Ryan ^a   Flurin, Pierre Henri ^b   Wright, Thomas ^c   Zuckerman, Joseph D ^d   Roche, Christopher P ^e  

^a Palm Beach Orthopaedic Institute   (United States)

^b Bordeaux Merignac Clinic   (France)

^c UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

^d NYU HOSPITAL FOR JOINT DISEASES   (United States)

^e Exactech Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty; MCID; Minimal clinically important difference; reverse total shoulder arthroplasty; shoulder arthroplasty; shoulder replacement

Indexed keywords

ABDUCTION; ACROMION; AGED; ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEMATOMA; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MINIMAL CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE; POSTOPERATIVE HEMORRHAGE; POSTOPERATIVE INFECTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHESIS LOOSENING; RANGE OF MOTION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; REVERSE SHOULDER ARTHROPLASTY; ROTATION; ROTATOR CUFF RUPTURE; SCAPULA FRACTURE; SHOULDER PAIN AND DISABILITY INDEX; TOTAL SHOULDER ARTHROPLASTY; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; ADULT; CLINICAL TRIAL; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; JOINT CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; PROCEDURES; SHOULDER; SHOULDER PAIN; SHOULDER REPLACEMENT; SURGERY; TIME FACTOR; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VERY ELDERLY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, SHOULDER; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MINIMAL CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE; PAIN, POSTOPERATIVE; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; SHOULDER JOINT; SHOULDER PAIN; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

EID: 85034845547     PISSN: 10582746     EISSN: 15326500     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2017.09.013     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Bhat, S.B., Lazarus, M., Getz, C., Williams, G.R. Jr, Namdari, S., Economic decision model suggests total shoulder arthroplasty is superior to hemiarthroplasty in young patients with end-stage shoulder arthritis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 474 (2016), 2482–2492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-016-4991-0.
2. Clement, N.D., MacDonald, D., Simpson, A.H., The minimal clinically important difference in the Oxford knee score and Short Form 12 score after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22 (2014), 1933–1939 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-013-2776-5.
3. Coe, M.P., Sutherland, J.M., Penner, M.J., Younger, A., Wing, K.J., Minimal clinically important difference and the effect of clinical variables on the ankle osteoarthritis scale in surgically treated end-stage ankle arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97 (2015), 818–823 http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.N.00147.
4. Elbuluk, A.M., O'Neill, O.R., Private bundles: the nuances of contracting and managing total joint arthroplasty episodes. J Arthroplasty 32 (2017), 1720–1722 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.02.018.
5. Flurin, P.H., Marczuk, Y., Janout, M., Wright, T.W., Zuckerman, J., Roche, C.P., Comparison of outcomes using anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Bull Hosp Jt Dis (2013) 71:Suppl 2 (2013), 101–107.
6. Flurin, P.H., Roche, C.P., Wright, T.W., Marczuk, Y., Zuckerman, J.D., A comparison and correlation of clinical outcome metrics in anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Bull Hosp Jt Dis (2013) 73:Suppl 1 (2015), S118–S123.
7. Fox, T.J., Foruria, A.M., Klika, B.J., Sperling, J.W., Schleck, C.D., Cofield, R.H., Radiographic survival in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 22 (2013), 1221–1227 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2012.12.034.
8. Franchignoni, F., Vercelli, S., Giordano, A., Sartorio, F., Bravini, E., Ferriero, G., Minimal clinically important difference of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand outcome measure (DASH) and its shortened version (QuickDASH). J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 44 (2014), 30–39 http://dx.doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2014.4893.
9. Frankle, M., Levy, J.C., Pupello, D., Siegal, S., Saleem, A., Mighell, M., et al. The reverse shoulder prosthesis for glenohumeral arthritis associated with severe rotator cuff deficiency. a minimum two-year follow-up study of sixty patients surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:Suppl 1 Pt 2 (2006), 178–190 http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00123.
10. Frankle, M., Siegal, S., Pupello, D., Saleem, A., Mighell, M., Vasey, M., The reverse shoulder prosthesis for glenohumeral arthritis associated with severe rotator cuff deficiency. A minimum two-year follow-up study of sixty patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87 (2005), 1697–1705 http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.D.02813.
11. Friedman, R.J., Flurin, P.H., Wright, T.W., Zuckerman, J.D., Roche, C.P., Comparison of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty outcomes with and without subscapularis repair. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 26 (2017), 662–668 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2016.09.027.
12. Glassman, S.D., Copay, A.G., Berven, S.H., Polly, D.W., Subach, B.R., Carreon, L.Y., Defining substantial clinical benefit following lumbar spine arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90 (2008), 1839–1847 http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.G.01095.
13. Guery, J., Favard, L., Sirveaux, F., Oudet, D., Mole, D., Walch, G., Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Survivorship analysis of eighty replacements followed for five to ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88 (2006), 1742–1747 http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.E.00851.
14. Jaeschke, R., Singer, J., Guyatt, G.H., Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 10 (1989), 407–415.
15. Kukkonen, J., Kauko, T., Vahlberg, T., Joukainen, A., Aarimaa, V., Investigating minimal clinically important difference for Constant score in patients undergoing rotator cuff surgery. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 22 (2013), 1650–1655 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2013.05.002.
16. Lazarus, M.D., Jensen, K.L., Southworth, C., Matsen, F.A. 3rd., The radiographic evaluation of keeled and pegged glenoid component insertion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A (2002), 1174–1182.
17. Lee W.C., Kwan Y.H., Chong H.C., Yeo S.J. The minimal clinically important difference for Knee Society Clinical Rating System after total knee arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis [Epub ahead of print]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4208-9.
18. Leopold, S.S., Porcher, R., Editorial: the minimum clinically important difference–the least we can do. Clin Orthop Relat Res 475 (2017), 929–932 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-017-5253-5.
19. Liu, S., Schwab, F., Smith, J.S., Klineberg, E., Ames, C.P., Mundis, G., et al. Likelihood of reaching minimal clinically important difference in adult spinal deformity: a comparison of operative and nonoperative treatment. Ochsner J 14 (2014), 67–77.
20. Melis, B., DeFranco, M., Ladermann, A., Mole, D., Favard, L., Nerot, C., et al. An evaluation of the radiological changes around the Grammont reverse geometry shoulder arthroplasty after eight to 12 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93 (2011), 1240–1246 http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.93B9.25926.
21. Mollon, B., Mahure, S.A., Roche, C.P., Zuckerman, J.D., Impact of glenosphere size on clinical outcomes after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: an analysis of 297 shoulders. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 25 (2016), 763–771 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2015.10.027.
22. Mollon, B., Mahure, S.A., Roche, C.P., Zuckerman, J.D., Impact of scapular notching on clinical outcomes after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: an analysis of 476 shoulders. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 26 (2017), 1253–1261 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2016.11.043.
23. Mulieri, P., Dunning, P., Klein, S., Pupello, D., Frankle, M., Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of irreparable rotator cuff tear without glenohumeral arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92 (2010), 2544–2556 http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.I.00912.
24. Norris, T.R., Iannotti, J.P., Functional outcome after shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis: a multicenter study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 11 (2002), 130–135 http://dx.doi.org/10.1067/mse.2002.121146.
25. Park, P., Okonkwo, D.O., Nguyen, S., Mundis, G.M. Jr, Than, K.D., Deviren, V., et al. Can a minimal clinically important difference be achieved in elderly patients with adult spinal deformity who undergo minimally invasive spinal surgery?. World Neurosurg 86 (2016), 168–172 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2015.09.072.
26. Shih, T., Nicholas, L.H., Thumma, J.R., Birkmeyer, J.D., Dimick, J.B., Does pay-for-performance improve surgical outcomes? An evaluation of phase 2 of the Premier Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration. Ann Surg 259 (2014), 677–681 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000425.
27. Simovitch, R., Flurin, P.H., Marczuk, Y., Friedman, R., Wrigh, T.W., Zuckerman, J.D., et al. Rate of improvement in clinical outcomes with anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Bull Hosp Jt Dis (2013) 73:Suppl 1 (2015), S111–S117.
28. Simovitch, R.W., Gerard, B.K., Brees, J.A., Fullick, R., Kearse, J.C., Outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in a senior athletic population. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 24 (2015), 1481–1485 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2015.03.011.
29. Simovitch, R.W., Zumstein, M.A., Lohri, E., Helmy, N., Gerber, C., Predictors of scapular notching in patients managed with the Delta III reverse total shoulder replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89 (2007), 588–600 http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00226.
30. Singh, J.A., Sperling, J.W., Cofield, R.H., Revision surgery following total shoulder arthroplasty: analysis of 2588 shoulders over three decades (1976 to 2008). J Bone Joint Surg Br 93 (2011), 1513–1517 http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.93B11.26938.
31. Tashjian, R.Z., Deloach, J., Green, A., Porucznik, C.A., Powell, A.P., Minimal clinically important differences in ASES and simple shoulder test scores after nonoperative treatment of rotator cuff disease. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92 (2010), 296–303 http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.H.01296.
32. Tashjian, R.Z., Hung, M., Keener, J.D., Bowen, R.C., McAllister, J., Chen, W., et al. Determining the minimal clinically important difference for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test, and visual analog scale (VAS) measuring pain after shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 26 (2017), 144–148 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2016.06.007.
33. Torchia, M.E., Cofield, R.H., Settergren, C.R., Total shoulder arthroplasty with the Neer prosthesis: long-term results. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 6 (1997), 495–505.
34. Torrens, C., Guirro, P., Santana, F., The minimal clinically important difference for function and strength in patients undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 25 (2016), 262–268 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2015.07.020.
35. Tubach, F., Ravaud, P., Baron, G., Falissard, B., Logeart, I., Bellamy, N., et al. Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvement. Ann Rheum Dis 64 (2005), 29–33 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ard.2004.022905.
36. Valenti, P., Katz, D., Kilinc, A., Elkholti, K., Gasiunas, V., Mid-term outcome of reverse shoulder prostheses in complex proximal humeral fractures. Acta Orthop Belg 78 (2012), 442–449.
37. Wall, B., Nove-Josserand, L., O'Connor, D.P., Edwards, T.B., Walch, G., Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a review of results according to etiology. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89 (2007), 1476–1485 http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00666.
38. Werner, B.C., Chang, B., Nguyen, J.T., Dines, D.M., Gulotta, L.V., What change in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score represents a clinically important change after shoulder arthroplasty?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 474 (2016), 2672–2681 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-016-4968-z.
39. Wright, T.W., Flurin, P.H., Crosby, L., Struk, A.M., Zuckerman, J.D., Total shoulder arthroplasty outcome for treatment of osteoarthritis: a multicenter study using a contemporary implant. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 44 (2015), 523–526.