Literature DB >> 31518155

Comparative Effectiveness of Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment for Rotator Cuff Tears: A Propensity Score Analysis From the ROW Cohort.

Nitin B Jain1,2, Gregory D Ayers3, Run Fan3, John E Kuhn2, Jon J P Warner4, Keith M Baumgarten5, Elizabeth Matzkin6, Laurence D Higgins7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The evidence to support operative versus nonoperative treatment for rotator cuff tears is sparse and inconclusive.
PURPOSE: To assess pain and functional outcomes in patients undergoing operative and nonoperative treatments for rotator cuff tears. STUDY
DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
METHODS: From March 2011 to February 2015, a multicenter cohort of patients with rotator cuff tears undergoing operative and nonoperative treatments was recruited. Patients completed a detailed history questionnaire, the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) standardized form and underwent magnetic resonance imaging. In addition to baseline assessments, patients received follow-up questionnaires at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months. Propensity score weighting was used to balance differences in characteristics of the operative and nonoperative groups.
RESULTS: Adjusted for propensity scores, the operative (n = 50) and nonoperative (n = 77) groups had similar characteristics, as evidenced by the small standardized mean differences between the groups. Adjusted mean differences in the SPADI and ASES scores between the operative and nonoperative groups were -22.0 points (95% CI, -32.1 to -11.8) and -22.2 points (95% CI, -32.8 to -11.6) at 18 months, respectively. The operative group had a significantly higher proportion of patients who showed ≥30% (P = .002) and ≥50% (P < .0001) improvement in SPADI and ASES scores as compared with the nonoperative group.
CONCLUSION: In this prospective cohort study, patients undergoing operative treatment had significantly better pain and functional outcomes as compared with patients undergoing nonoperative treatment for rotator cuff tears. Differences between the 2 groups in SPADI and ASES scores at the 6- to 18-month time points met the minimal clinically important difference (depending on the threshold used). A large randomized controlled trial is needed to answer this question more definitively.

Entities:  

Keywords:  arthroscopic surgery; nonoperative; rotator cuff tears

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31518155      PMCID: PMC7325686          DOI: 10.1177/0363546519873840

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Sports Med        ISSN: 0363-5465            Impact factor:   6.202


  53 in total

1.  Conservative treatment of rotator cuff tears.

Authors:  E Itoi; S Tabata
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 2.  Indications for surgery in clinical outcome studies of rotator cuff repair.

Authors:  Robert G Marx; Panagiotis Koulouvaris; Samuel K Chu; Bruce A Levy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-10-24       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder.

Authors:  C R Constant; A H Murley
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1987-01       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  National trends in rotator cuff repair.

Authors:  Alexis Chiang Colvin; Natalia Egorova; Alicia K Harrison; Alan Moskowitz; Evan L Flatow
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  A serial comparison of arthroscopic repairs for partial- and full-thickness rotator cuff tears.

Authors:  Jin-Young Park; Kyung-Tae Chung; Moon-Jib Yoo
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.772

6.  Effect of medical comorbidity on self-assessed pain, function, and general health status after rotator cuff repair.

Authors:  Robert Z Tashjian; R Frank Henn; Lana Kang; Andrew Green
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Treatment of Nontraumatic Rotator Cuff Tears: A Randomized Controlled Trial with Two Years of Clinical and Imaging Follow-up.

Authors:  Juha Kukkonen; Antti Joukainen; Janne Lehtinen; Kimmo T Mattila; Esa K J Tuominen; Tommi Kauko; Ville Äärimaa
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  The Propensity Score.

Authors:  Jason S Haukoos; Roger J Lewis
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Management of degenerative rotator cuff tears: a review and treatment strategy.

Authors:  Nicholas D Clement; Yuan X Nie; Julie M McBirnie
Journal:  Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Ther Technol       Date:  2012-12-14

10.  Evaluating cutpoints for the MHI-5 and MCS using the GHQ-12: a comparison of five different methods.

Authors:  Mark J Kelly; Frank D Dunstan; Keith Lloyd; David L Fone
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2008-02-19       Impact factor: 3.630

View more
  4 in total

1.  Comparative Time to Improvement in Nonoperative and Operative Treatment of Rotator Cuff Tears.

Authors:  Amos Song; Joshua DeClercq; Gregory D Ayers; Laurence D Higgins; John E Kuhn; Keith M Baumgarten; Elizabeth Matzkin; Nitin B Jain
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 6.558

2.  COVID-19-related rotator cuff repair delay.

Authors:  Karch M Smith; J Cade Wheelwright; Garrett V Christensen; Hiroaki Ishikawa; Robert Z Tashjian; Peter N Chalmers
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2021-10-22

3.  The clinical outcomes of infraspinatus rotational transfer for irreparable posterosuperior rotator cuff tears: a preliminary report.

Authors:  Nobuya Harada; Eiichi Ishitani; Masafumi Gotoh; Naoto Shiba
Journal:  Clin Shoulder Elb       Date:  2022-06-27

4.  Decreased Synovial Fluid Biomarkers Levels Are Associated with Rehabilitation of Function and Pain in Rotator Cuff Tear Patients Following Electroacupuncture Therapy.

Authors:  Jian Guan; Wei-Qiang Geng; Yao Li; Guang-Yuan Liu; Luo-Bin Ding; You-Jie Liu; Wei Xue; Huajun Wang; Xiao-Fei Zheng
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2020-09-11
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.