Faculty Bibliography

Background/UNASSIGNED:The purpose of our study was to examine the impact that an increased body mass index (BMI) has on arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (aRCR) outcomes. Methods/UNASSIGNED:We identified a sample of 313 patients who underwent aRCR at our institution from 2017 to 2020. Patients were classified into cohorts by BMI: normal BMI (<25), overweight (25-30), and obese (≥30). Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores (Pain Interference, Pain Intensity, and Upper Extremity) and Clinical Global Impressions scale rating of pain and functional improvement after surgery were obtained at 1 year postoperatively. The significance of the BMI category as a predictor for outcomes was evaluated using multiple linear and multivariable logistic regressions. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis with Youden's J-statistic was used to determine optimal BMI cutoff for predicting likelihood of achieving minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) on the Clinical Global Impressions scales. Results/UNASSIGNED: > .05). Optimal BMI cutoffs were determined for pain MCID (40.8), pain SCB (26.8), function MCID (27.4), and function SCB (26.8), but all cutoffs had low correct classification rates (≤13%). Discussion and Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:Obesity was not found to be an independent risk factor for increased rotator cuff tear size or tendon involvement but was nonetheless associated with worse upper extremity function and pain after aRCR.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Patient's willingness and barriers for discharge after shoulder arthroplasty (SA) has not been studied. The aim of this study was to prospectively analyze patient's willingness for discharge and barriers to discharge beyond postoperative day #1 (POD#1) after SA. Methods/UNASSIGNED:In this prospective study, patients undergoing primary or revision SA (anatomic, reverse, or hemiarthroplasty) at our institution were enrolled to determine their willingness and concerns for discharge after SA. Patient's willingness for discharge was inquired daily until discharge. Demographic information, patient's medical history, intraoperative details (duration of surgery, estimated blood loss, intraoperative complication), discharge disposition, length of stay (LOS), and reasons for extension of LOS beyond POD#1 were analyzed. Results/UNASSIGNED:A total of 184 patients who underwent SA were included. Eight patients were discharged on POD#0, 114 patients on POD#1, 37 patients on POD#2, and 25 patients after POD#2. One hundred nineteen (119) patients were discharged to home, 40 were discharged to home with services, 15 were discharged to nursing facilities, and 10 were discharged to rehabilitation centers. Reasons for extension of LOS past POD#1 included patients failing to clear home safety evaluation (n = 4), inadequate pain control (n = 6), worsening of preexisting medical conditions (n = 8), delay in patient disposition (awaiting placement in a rehabilitation facility [n = 6] and awaiting culture results [n = 9]). Social reasons (n = 29) were the most common reasons for extension of LOS. These included patients requesting an extra day of stay (n = 20), patients requesting rehabilitation facility placement (n = 5), lack of a timely ride home (n = 2), and family-related reasons (death in the family [n = 1], lack of home help [n = 1]). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:This prospective study demonstrates modifiable factors associated with LOS beyond POD#1 (inadequate pain control, logistic delays in disposition, and patient-related social concerns) after SA. With increasing interest in same-day discharge and rising concerns to control cost and use bundled payment initiatives with SA, improving patient's willingness to discharge by addressing their concerns can improve early discharge after SA.

Background/UNASSIGNED:History of prior rotator cuff repair (RCR) may adversely affect the outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), but there is no information regarding the influence of prior superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) surgery on the outcomes of RTSA. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of RTSA following failed arthroscopic SCR. Methods/UNASSIGNED:All patients who underwent RTSA for failed SCR (SCR cohort) at our institution were identified from our institutional database. A comparative cohort of patients who had RTSA with a history of failed RCR (Control cohort) was also reviewed. Demographic information, 90-day complication rate, 90-day emergency department visits, length of stay, and outcome scores (patient-reported outcomes measurement information system [PROMIS] physical function upper extremity, Visual Analog Scale score, and range of motion) were compared. Results/UNASSIGNED:From 2015 to 2020, 87 arthroscopic SCRs were performed at our institution and of these, 13 patients underwent RTSA at a mean time of 14.6 months (5.8-32.4) after SCR and were followed up for an average of 17.9 months (1.6-44.6). The average number of shoulder surgeries prior to RTSA was 2.8 (1-7), with the last surgery being SCR. During the same period, we identified 15 patients who underwent an RTSA after a failed RCR (control cohort). The RTSA in the control cohort was performed on average at 12.8 months (1.5-39.5) following the last RCR, and patients were followed up for an average of 27.7 months (2.8-53.9). The average number of shoulder surgeries before the RTSA in the control cohort was 1.4 (1-3). Although the SCR cohort had significant improvements in pain scores and forward flexion (FF), there was only a modest functional improvement with PROMIS scores and no meaningful improvement with external rotation. Complications (23%) in the SCR cohort included 1 periprosthetic joint infection requiring 2-stage revision, 1 acromion stress fracture, and 1 ulnar neuritis. Overall, compared to the SCR cohort, patients in the control cohort had better function (PROMIS physical function upper extremity), lower Visual Analog Scale score, and greater range of motion (FF and external rotation) preoperatively and at last follow-up, but there were no differences in the length of stay and 90-day emergency department visits, infection, and complication rate between the 2 cohorts. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:RTSA after failed SCR improves pain and FF but is associated with modest functional improvements and high complication rates. However, these findings will require confirmation in a larger cohort with longer follow-up.

Glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) in the young adult remains a challenging clinical problem to treat. These difficulties stem from the high physical demands and expectations of this patient population, limited longevity of existing treatment modalities, and need for a future revision surgery after primary surgical intervention. Given the heterogeneous etiology, clinical presentation, and radiographic findings, a thorough understanding of the pathology, patient expectations, and outcomes of existing treatment options available is necessary to deliver a treatment that is tailored to individual needs of the patient. None of the available treatment options have shown to alter the natural history of GHOA. Nonsurgical modalities continue to be the first line treatment but there is no consensus if one treatment is more effective than the other. Surgical options include shoulder preserving and shoulder replacing procedures and are usually considered after the nonsurgical options become ineffective in controlling a patient's symptoms. Total shoulder arthroplasty provides predictable pain relief and improvement of function but is limited by the longevity of the implant. Despite the growing research, there continues to be search for a long lasting, durable treatment option that would compete with a young adult's lifetime.

The biomechanical concepts underlying total shoulder arthroplasty including differences between the anatomic total and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) are reviewed. The concept of lateralization and its implications on outcomes after RTSA is explained through a historical perspective. Finally, how lateralization can be achieved via different components of an RTSA construct, as well as the potential disadvantages or trade-offs that must be considered when lateralizing in reverse shoulder arthroplasty, are discussed.

Case/UNASSIGNED:We report a rare case of a spontaneous, atraumatic rupture of the anterior and middle heads of the deltoid with an underlying massive rotator cuff tear. Unique clinical findings included a palpable mass of torn deltoid distally with a proximal tissue defect. Magnetic resonance imaging of the deltoid demonstrated complete tear of the anterior head; involvement of the middle head was found intraoperatively. Given the acute nature of injury and potential impact on the feasibility of future reverse shoulder arthroplasty, surgical repair of the torn deltoid was discussed with the patient and performed via superior approach. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:Direct surgical repair is a viable treatment option if diagnosed early.

BACKGROUND:The objective of this study is to assess patient satisfaction and preference for telemedicine- versus in-person visits for outpatient shoulder and elbow musculoskeletal consultation during the COVID-19 pandemic and in the future. METHODS:Patients who had telemedicine visits for shoulder and elbow musculoskeletal complaints at a single institution from March through June, 2020, were invited to respond to a post-visit survey. The survey included a standardized questionnaire that focused on the patient's satisfaction with the telemedicine visit(s) during the pandemic and preference for using the telemedicine platform in the future following the pandemic. Additional details regarding their virtual visits (severity of their medical condition, previous virtual- or ER visits) were also obtained. Data regarding patient demographics and visit details (primary diagnosis, type of visit, length of visit, treating physician) were extracted from electronic medical records. RESULTS:In total, 153 patients participated in the study. Overall, high satisfaction scores regarding the telemedicine visit were noted: 91% of patients reported that their concerns were adequately addressed, 89% would recommend telemedicine to a friend and 94% stated that they would use this platform again in the presence of a situation like the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the majority of patients (76%) reported a preference for in-person visits for the same musculoskeletal complaint if it were not for COVID-19. A telemedicine visit duration of more than 10 minutes and a first-time telemedicine visit correlated with higher satisfaction rates (P=0.037 and P=0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:COVID-19 has provided a boost to the use of our telemedicine platform, with a high satisfaction rate among patients with shoulder and elbow musculoskeletal complaints, largely due to safety reasons and limited access to in-person doctor visits. However, a considerable number of patients would have preferred in-person visits for similar health complaints if there were no pandemic. Further research on optimizing the selection of patients for telemedicine visits and addressing their expectations and concerns regarding their visits will improve patients' preference for future telemedicine visits.

Background/UNASSIGNED:The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System minimal clinically important difference (PROMIS MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) of patient-reported outcome measures provide clinical significance to patient-reported outcome measures scores. The goal of this study is to measure the MCID, SCB, and PASS of PROMIS Upper Extremity v2.0 (PROMIS UE) in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Methods/UNASSIGNED:All patients who underwent TSA since October 2017 were identified from our institutional database. Patients who had completed the PROMIS UE outcome measure before surgery were asked to complete a PROMIS UE and anchor survey that contained two transition questions to assess patient satisfaction and change in symptoms since treatment. The anchor-based MCID, SCB, and PASS were calculated as the change in PROMIS UE score that represented the optimal cutoff for a receiver operating characteristic curve. The distribution-based MCID was calculated as a range between the average standard error of measurement multiplied by 2 different constants: 1 and 2.77. Results/UNASSIGNED:This study enrolled 165 patients. The anchor-based MCID for PROMIS UE was calculated to be 8.05 with an AUC of 0.814. The anchor-based SCB was calculated to be 10.0 with an AUC of 0.727. The distribution-based MCID was calculated to be between 3.12 and 8.65. The PASS was calculated to be 37.2 with an AUC of 0.90. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:The establishment of MCID, SCB, and PASS for PROMIS UE scores after shoulder arthroplasty provides meaningful and objective clinical interpretation of the improvements in outcome scores after TSA.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To correlate the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity (PROMIS UE) score with preexisting validated outcomes scores, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES), and Constant score (CS) in patients with idiopathic adhesive capsulitis (AC). METHODS:Patients with a clinical diagnosis of idiopathic AC ("freezing" or "frozen" phases) who agreed to complete the ASES, CS, and PROMIS UE scores during their office visit were included in this study. Trained researchers performed the objective clinical assessments on the included patients. Responses to the 3 outcomes scores were statistically analyzed and compared utilizing Pearson correlation coefficients. Floor and ceiling effects were calculated. RESULTS:The final cohort included 100 patients with AC of which there were 72% female and 87% right hand dominant, with a mean age of 55 years. The PROMIS UE required fewer question responses (5.02 ±1.84) compared to the fixed questions burden with ASES (12) and CS (9). The mean outcome scores were 34.6 ± 2.5 (PROMIS UE), 55 ± 22 (ASES), and 51 ± 16 (CS). The PROMIS UE displayed excellent correlation with both the ASES (r = 0.80, 95% [CI: 0.72, 0.86], p < 0.001) and CS (r = 0.76, 95% CI [0.67, 0.83], p < 0.001). Neither ceiling nor floor effects were present. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The PROMIS UE displayed comparable efficacy to commonly used legacy outcome scores (ASES and CS) in adhesive capsulitis. A lower question burden with the PROMIS UE carries a potential for wider acceptibility with the researchers and patients with shoulder pathology.

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine if addition of CT to axillary radiographs (AXR) alters preoperative decision making for shoulder arthroplasty. Methods: Preoperative deidentified images (XR alone and XR with CT) of 50 patients with glenohumeral arthritis were reviewed independently by 3 reviewers in a blinded fashion. Each reviewer graded images for glenoid wear pattern as simple (Walch A1 or B1) or advanced [A2, B2, C]), adequacy of AXR and need for advanced imaging. The reviewers determined a preoperative plan for all patients based on XR alone vs. XR and CT including the arthroplasty type (anatomic or reverse total shoulder) and their plan for treating glenoid wear (eccentric or standard reaming vs. bone graft or augment). Kappa values (κ) were calculated to determine inter-rater agreement and consistency among multiple reviewers. Fisher's exact test was used to assess any difference in preoperative plan once the shoulders were separated into simple and advanced glenoid wear patterns. Results: The 3 reviewers agreed that quality of AXRs was significantly inadequate (P <.001) for assessing glenoid wear in advanced glenoid wear patterns compared to simple wear patterns. Following evaluation on AXRs alone, the need for CT imaging was significantly higher in advanced glenoid wear patterns compare to simple ones (81% vs. 31%; P <.001). The addition of CT images did not result in a significant change to the preoperative plan in simple glenoid wear patterns but in advanced glenoid wear, addition of CT can change the preoperative plan with respect to arthroplasty type and/or strategy for addressing glenoid wear. Conclusion: Axillary radiographs are often inadequate for preoperative planning in shoulder arthritis with advanced glenoid wear patterns (Walch A2, B2, C types). Addition of CT imaging to radiographs in shoulder arthritis with advanced glenoid wear can affect the preoperative decision with respect to type of shoulder arthroplasty and/or plan for addressing glenoid wear (reaming, bone graft or augmented glenoids). Level of evidence: Level IV