Dataset Information

A Review of Online Rehabilitation Protocols Designated for Rotator Cuff Repairs.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To compare publicly available rehabilitation protocols designated for rotator cuff (RTC) repairs published online by academic residency programs and private practice institutions.

Methods

A systematic electronic search using the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database Access System (FREIDA) was performed for RTC repair rehabilitation protocols. Private practice programs with published rehabilitation protocols that were discovered during the Google search were also included for review, but no comprehensive search for private practice protocols was performed. The main exclusion criteria consisted of non-English-language protocols and protocols without any of the time-based components in question. Included protocols were assessed independently based on the specified RTC tear size (small [≤1 cm], medium [1-4 cm], large or massive [≥5 cm], or no mention of size). Protocols were compared based on the inclusion, exclusion, and timing of certain rehabilitation components.

Results

A total of 96 rehabilitation protocols were included for review, from 39 academic institutions and 28 private practice programs. Specific instructions for concomitant biceps tenodesis were included in 26 protocols (27.1%). Of the 96 protocols, 88 (91.7%) did not place restrictions on early postoperative passive range of motion (PROM) of the shoulder. Isolated PROM with restrictions on active range of motion was most commonly recommended for the first 4 or 6 weeks postoperatively (80.2%). Use of a sling or immobilizer was most frequently recommended for the first 4 or 6 weeks postoperatively (78.1%). Wide variation was noted in recommendations for returning to resistance strengthening, with the highest incidence being 27 protocols recommending returning at 12 weeks (28.1%); this further varied based on the size of the tear. A total of 21 protocols (21.9%) recommended the use of cryotherapy postoperatively.

Conclusions

Although certain rehabilitation components were common, such as duration of PROM and sling or immobilizer use, a large degree of variation remains among published rehabilitation protocols after RTC repair, and this variability is still seen even when subdividing by the size or severity of the RTC tear.

Clinical relevance

Rehabilitation after RTC repair is crucial to patient outcomes. This study summarizes the variability among online rehabilitation protocols for RTC repair in the United States and emphasizes the importance of appropriate rehabilitation after RTC surgery.

SUBMITTER: Coda RG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7283951 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo compare publicly available rehabilitation protocols designated for meniscal repairs published online to determine the variability in meniscus repair protocols including different types of tears (radial vs nonradial repairs).MethodsFrom the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database Access System (FREIDA), a list of publicly available academic residency programs and orthopaedic sports medicine fellowships was obtained. With this list, an electronic search using Google was performed looking for meniscal repair rehabilitation protocols. In addition to academic institutions, private practice organizations with published meniscus repair rehabilitation protocols found during the search also were examined.ResultsOf 189 academic institutions, a total of 30 academic institutions had protocols that were included. Another 29 private practice programs were subsequently found and included. In total, 59 rehabilitation protocols fit the inclusion criteria. Six of the 59 specified radial repair and 53 did not. For return to full range of motion, nonradial protocols averaged 6.7 weeks and radial protocols averaged 7.3 weeks. For return to full weight-bearing, nonradial protocols averaged 6.2 weeks and radial protocols averaged 7.5 weeks. For return to sport, nonradial protocols averaged 17.8 weeks and radial protocols averaged 23.3 weeks. For time spent in a brace, nonradial protocols averaged 5.7 weeks and radial protocols averaged 6.7 weeks.ConclusionsOf publicly available meniscal repair rehabilitation protocols, a small percentage (10.2%) changed their protocol in relation to tear type and there was a wide range of timeframes for each rehabilitation component. Protocols for radial tears tended to brace patients longer, limit their range of motion longer, delay full weight-bearing, and delay return to sport. However, it is recognized that some surgeons could be modifying their protocols in relation to tear type without publishing that information online.Clinical relevanceAs stated in the purpose, the point of this study was to access only the protocols that would be available to the public. If anything, awareness should be raised for surgeons to look at their existing protocols and update them if they are truly incomplete and outdated. More research needs to be done to structure a rehabilitation protocol that is specific to the meniscal tear type, as the current protocols have a wide range of variance.

Project description:PurposeTo determine whether anterior cable tears could be identified at the time of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and determine the characteristics of the anterior cable tears identified.MethodsFrom 2016 to 2017 all shoulder arthroscopies had data collected prospectively at the time of surgery, specifically including injury to the capsular and tendon zones of insertion on the greater tuberosity. Anterior cable position and degree of injury and medialization were recorded, as well as complete findings of the diagnostic arthroscopy. The inclusion criterion was primary shoulder arthroscopy. The exclusion criterion was any revision shoulder arthroscopy. All arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs (ARCR) were grouped together and all other nonarthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgeries (non-ARCR) were grouped together.ResultsIn total, 118 shoulder arthroscopies had data collected prospectively at the time of surgery: 90 primary shoulder arthroscopies met the inclusion criteria; 28 were excluded because they were revision surgeries. There were 42 patients in the ARCR group (Group 1). Six of these were partial tears, and 36 were full-thickness tears. There were 48 patients in the non-ARCR group (Group 2). The non-ARCR Group 2 served as an anatomic baseline for ARCR Group 1. In all 90 shoulders, the rotator cable and anterior cable were identified. Group 1 (ARCR) incidence of anterior cable tears with abnormal position was 71.4% compared to 2.1% in group 2 (non-ARCR) (P < .001) Group 1 (ARCR) incidence of anterior cable tears with normal anterior cable position (n = 12) was compared to abnormal anterior cable position (n = 30). Injury to the anterior footprint capsular and tendon zones were compared. Normal anterior cable position correlated with no or low-grade injury to anterior footprint capsular zone. (Nimura zone C1). Abnormal anterior cable displacement graded as moderate (n = 20) and severe (n = 10) were compared for injury to the anterior footprint. Moderate displacement correlated with complete or high grade injury to C1 in 85% and complete injury to R1 in 45% (P < .001 and .049). In severe displacement complete C1 injury was 100%, and complete R1 injury was 100% (P < .001 and .001).ConclusionsAnterior cable tears are universally identified in ARCR. Three patterns of medial displacement severity correlated with injury to a crucial insertion zone (C1) at the anterior footprint. The degree of anterior cable disruption at the anterior footprint and displacement was commonly disproportionately greater than the injury to the supraspinatus.Level of evidenceLevel III, diagnostic study.

Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the effectiveness of early rehabilitation compared with delayed/standard rehabilitation after rotator cuff repair for pain, function, range of movement, strength, and repair integrity.DesignSystematic review and meta-analyses.MethodsWe searched databases and included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing early with delayed/standard rehabilitation for patients undergoing rotator cuff repair surgery. We assessed risk of bias of the RCTs using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool.ResultsTwenty RCTs, with 1841 patients, were included. The majority of the RCTs were of high or unclear risk of overall bias. We found substantial variations in the rehabilitation programmes, time in the sling and timing of exercise progression. We found no statistically significant differences for pain and function at any follow-up except for the outcome measure Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation at six months (MD: 6.54; 95%CI: 2.24-10.84) in favour of early rehabilitation. We found statistically significant differences in favour of early rehabilitation for shoulder flexion at six weeks (MD: 7.36; 95%CI: 2.66-12.06), three (MD: 8.45; 95%CI: 3.43-13.47) and six months (MD: 3.57; 95%CI: 0.81-6.32) and one year (MD: 1.42; 95%CI: 0.21-2.64) and similar differences for other planes of movement. In terms of repair integrity, early mobilisation does not seem to increase the risk of re-tears (OR:1.05; 95%CI: 0.64-1.75).DiscussionCurrent approaches to early mobilisation, based largely on early introduction of passive movement, did not demonstrate significant differences in most clinical outcomes, although we found statistically significant differences in favour of early rehabilitation for range of movement. Importantly, there were no differences in repair integrity between early and delayed/standard rehabilitation. Most rehabilitation programmes did not consider early active movement as soon as the patient feels able. With ongoing variation in rehabilitation protocols there remains a need for large high quality RCT to inform the optimal approach to rehabilitation after rotator cuff repair surgery.

Project description:PurposeTo determine the effects of dialysis on postoperative and perioperative complications following rotator cuff repair (RCR) and knee arthroscopy (KA).MethodsThe National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) was queried from 2006 to 2018. Groups were matched for age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, preoperative functional status, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status. Chi-squared tests and Fisher's exact tests were used to analyze the comorbidities. Differences in occurrences of postoperative adverse events (AE), mortality within 30 days, reoperations with 30 days, extended hospital stay (≥2 days), and readmissions within 30 days were analyzed using the Mantel-Haenszel test. Sign tests were used to evaluate differences in operative time, as well as length of hospital stay.ResultsDialysis patients in both the RCR and KA groups had greater odds of experiencing any AE (OR: 6.33 and 7.46, P value: .031 and <.001, respectively) and readmission within 30 days (OR: 10.5 and 4.1, P value: .015 and .014, respectively). They also had significantly greater operating times (P = .049 for both). Dialysis patients undergoing KA had greater odds of staying in the hospital ≥2 days (OR: 10, P = <.001) and being reoperated on within 30 days (OR: 3.78, P = .033). The total hospital stay was significantly greater for dialysis patients in the KA group (P < .001) but not in the RCR group (P = .088). None of the individual AE's significantly differed between the dialysis and non-dialysis patients in the RCR cohort; however, dialysis patients in the KA cohort had greater incidences of three AE's.ConclusionsThis study identified significantly worse short-term complication rates in dialysis patients undergoing RCR and KA. Careful preoperative evaluation and postoperative surveillance are warranted in this high-risk patient group. Patients should be counseled appropriately on the increased complication risks associated with RCR and KA surgeries.Level of evidenceLevel III, retrospective cohort study.