Dataset Information

Validation of a Mobile Version of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form: An Observational Randomized Crossover Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) questionnaire is an effective tool for evaluating shoulder joint function. The development and usage of a mobile version of the ASES questionnaire has the potential to save time, money, and effort.

Objective

The aim of this study is to assess the equivalence between the paper and mobile versions of the ASES questionnaire and their acceptability among patients.

Methods

The paper and mobile versions of the ASES questionnaire were used to evaluate the shoulder joint function of 50 patients with shoulder pain. This study included patients from the shoulder clinic of Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman method were used to evaluate the agreement (reliability) of the scores obtained by the two methods (paper versus mobile).

Results

Of the 50 patients recruited from March 2018 to May 2019, 46 (92%) completed the study. There was a high agreement between the paper and mobile versions of the ASES questionnaire (ICC=0.979, 95% CI 0.943-0.987; P<.001). The mean difference between the scores of the mobile and paper versions was 1.0, and only 1/46 (2%) had a difference greater than the minimal clinically important difference of 12 points. About 75% of patients preferred the mobile version to the paper version.

Conclusions

Our study shows that the mobile version of the ASES questionnaire is comparable to the paper version, and has a higher patient preference. This could prove to be a useful tool for epidemiological studies and patient follow-up over longer periods of time.

SUBMITTER: Hou J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7395247 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validation of a Mobile Version of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form: An Observational Randomized Crossover Trial.

Hou Jingyi J Li Qingyue Q Yu Menglei M Li Fangqi F Tang Yiyong Y Long Yi Y Alike Yamuhanmode Y Zhang Yuanhao Y Ali Maslah Idiris MI Zhang Congda C Li Weiping W Yang Rui R

JMIR mHealth and uHealth 20200717 7

<h4>Background</h4>The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) questionnaire is an effective tool for evaluating shoulder joint function. The development and usage of a mobile version of the ASES questionnaire has the potential to save time, money, and effort.<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of this study is to assess the equivalence between the paper and mobile versions of the ASES questionnaire and their acceptability among patients.<h4>Methods</h4>The paper ...[more]

PMID: 32706731

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPartial-thickness rotator cuff tears (PTRCTs), often considered less severe than full-thickness rotator cuff tears (FTRCTs), can be equally symptomatic. Despite the prevalence of PTRCTs, scholarly attention has predominantly focused on FTRCTs, resulting in a relative neglect of PTRCTs. This study aimed to assess the incidence of surgical repairs for PTRCTs in the United States (U.S.) using the Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample (NASS) database and delineate practice patterns among a group of American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) members.MethodsThe NASS database, representing approximately 67% of U.S. ambulatory surgical encounters, was queried to obtain the incidence of PTRCT and FTRCT repairs for the year 2019. Data on patient sex, hospital location, setting, teaching affiliation and size, and primary payor were also obtained. Separately, a retrospective chart review was conducted by 13 ASES research group members, collecting data on rotator cuff repairs performed from July 2021 to June 2022 at their individual institutions. Collected data included age, sex, extent and type of rotator cuff tears, duration of symptoms prior to surgical repair, and type and duration of nonoperative treatment.ResultsThe NASS database showed that PTRCT repairs accounted for at least 23% of the 187,787 rotator cuff repairs performed in 2019, with potential underestimation due to unspecified tear categorization. The retrospective chart review of the ASES research group revealed that PTRCT repairs constituted 27.8% of all rotator cuff repairs with substantial variability among institutions (8.6%-67.1%), that nonoperative measures were commonly employed, with a mean 12-month duration before surgical repair, and that the most common type of nonoperative treatment was supervised physical therapy combined with corticosteroid injection (37.7%).DiscussionThis study revealed approximately one-fourth of all rotator cuff repairs conducted in the U.S. were attributed to PTRCTs with substantial variability in proportion of PTRCT repairs across individual orthopedic practices. The overall duration of nonoperative treatment was consistent with the existing literature. This study provides insights into the landscape of PTRCT repairs and associated practice patterns. Further investigation into factors influencing treatment decisions is warranted.

Project description:BackgroundRotator cuff tears are a common cause of shoulder pain and can result in prolonged periods of pain, disability and absence from work. Rotator cuff repair surgery is increasingly used in an attempt to resolve symptoms but has failure rates of around 40%. There is a pressing need to improve the outcome of rotator cuff repairs. Patch augmentation increasingly being used within the NHS in an attempt to reduce repair failures. The aim of this survey was to determine current UK practice and opinion relating to the factors that influence choice of patch, current patient selection and willingness to assist with generation of improved evidence.MethodsAn online survey was sent to the surgeon members of the British Elbow and Shoulder Society (BESS). Questions covered respondent demographics, experience with patches, indications for patch augmentation and willingness to be involved in a randomised trial of patch augmented rotator cuff surgery.ResultsThe response rate was 105/550 (19%). 58% of respondents had used a patch to augment rotator cuff surgery. 70% of patch users had undertaken an augmented repair within the last 6 months. A wide surgical experience in augmentation was reported (ranging 1 to 200 implants used). However, most surgeons reported low volume usage, with a median of 5 rotator cuff augmentation procedures performed. At least 10 different products had been used. Most of the patches used were constructed from human decellularised dermis tissue, although porcine derived and synthetic based patches had also been used. Only 3-5% stated they would undertake an augmented repair for small tears across ages, whereas 28-40% and 19-59% would do so for large or massive tears respectively. When assessing patient suitability, patient age seemed relevant only for those with large and massive tears. Half of the surgeons reported an interest in taking part in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the role of patch augmentation for rotator cuff surgery, with a further 22% of respondent's undecided.ConclusionsA variety of patches have been used by surgeons to augment rotator cuff repair with a wide range of operator experience. There was substantial uncertainty about which patch to use and differing views on which patients were most suitable. There is a clear need for robust clinical evaluation and further research in this area.

Project description:BackgroundBoth occupational physicians and orthopedic surgeons can be involved in the management of work relevant musculoskeletal disorders. These physicians hardly communicate with each other and this might lead to different advice to the patient. Therefore, we evaluated a standardized information exchange form for the exchange of relevant information between the orthopedic surgeon and the occupational physician. The main goals of this qualitative study are to evaluate whether the form improved information exchange, whether the form gave relevant information, and to generate ideas to further improve this information exchange.MethodsThe information exchange form was developed in two consensus meetings with five orthopedic surgeons and five occupational physicians. To evaluate the information exchange form, a qualitative evaluation was set up. Structured telephone interviews were undertaken with the patients, interviews with the physicians were face-to-face and semi-structured, based on a topic list. These interviews were recorded and literally transcribed. Each interview was analyzed separately in Atlas-Ti.ResultsThe form was used for 8 patients, 7 patients agreed to participate in the qualitative evaluation. All three orthopedic surgeons involved and three of the six involved occupational physicians agreed to be interviewed. The form was transferred to 4 occupational physicians, the other 3 patients recovered before they visited the occupational physician. The information on the form was regarded to be useful. All orthopedic surgeons agreed that the occupational physician should take the initiative. Most physicians felt that the form should not be filled out for each patient visiting an orthopedic surgeon, but only for those patients who do not recover as expected. Orthopedic surgeons suggested that a copy of the medical information provided to the general practitioner could also be provided to occupational physicians.ConclusionThe information exchange form was regarded to be useful and could be used in practice. The occupational physician should take the initiative for using this form and most physicians felt the information should only be exchanged for patients who do not recover as expected. That means that the advantage of giving information early in the treatment is lost.

Dataset Information

Validation of a Mobile Version of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form: An Observational Randomized Crossover Trial.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Validation of a Mobile Version of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form: An Observational Randomized Crossover Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets