Are Patient-Reported Outcome Scores a Reasonable Substitute for Clinical Follow-up After Surgically Managed Acromioclavicular Joint Injuries?

Subjective Shoulder Value for Sport Is a Simple, Reliable, and Valid Score to Assess Shoulder Function in Athletes

PURPOSE

To validate the subjective shoulder value for sport (SSV-Sport) by measuring its correlation with existing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and defining its psychometric properties.

METHODS

Between May 2021 and May 2022, we established 2 patient groups. Group 1 included those (1) aged 18 years or older, who were (2) consulting for the first time for any shoulder condition, (3) regularly participated in sports, and were capable of accessing a questionnaire independently. There were asked to rate their SSV and SSV-Sport at admission and 2 weeks later; they also were asked to answer a questionnaire including other PROMS. Group 2 comprised patients who had (1) undergone shoulder stabilization surgery and had (2) a minimum follow-up period of 6 months.

RESULTS

For the shoulder disability patients (group 1, n = 62), there was a strong and significant correlation between SSV-Sport and other PROMs: Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Sport (r = 0.84), Walch-Duplay (r = 0.65), Rowe (r = 0.74), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (r = 0.78), and SSV (r = 0.75) (P = .0001). The SSV-Sport was reliable at baseline and 2 weeks after (0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.85-0.94), and was responsive to change (P < .001). For the anterior instability patients (group 2, n = 83), SSV was on average 50 points greater than SSV-Sport (29.2 vs 79.4, P < .001) for preoperative values. In both groups, the values of SSV were constantly and significantly higher than the values of SSV-Sport (81.9 ± 21.3 vs 54.8 ± 30.9; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The SSV-Sport is an easily administered, reliable, responsive, and valid measure of shoulder function in athletes that is highly correlated with other PROMs. SSV-Sport is better adapted than SSV to quantify pre- and postoperative shoulder deficiency in athletes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, cohort study (diagnosis).

Superior clinical results for early arthroscopic treatment of grade IIIb and V acromioclavicular joint instability compared to delayed operative treatment

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopy-assisted cortical fixation devices have been increasingly used in the operative management of both acute and chronic cases of acromioclavicular joint instability (ACJI). It has been hypothesized that delayed surgical management leads to inferior clinical and radiologic outcomes compared to acute treatment. The purpose of this study is to compare clinical and radiologic outcomes, scapula dyskinesia, and failure or revision rates of arthroscopically treated acute and chronic ACJI.

METHODS

This retrospective study of prospectively collected data included all surgically treated patients with grade IIIb and V chronic ACJI between 2013 and 2017, matched 1:1 to a group of acute grade IIIb and V ACJI patients treated during the same time period. Chronic ACJI was defined as delayed surgical treatment >21 days after injury. Chronic cases received an additional hamstring autograft next to the suture pulley systems. Follow-up was obtained at an average of 3.2 years (range: 1.4-6.2). Clinical outcome scores included the Constant-Murley Score (CMS), Taft Score (TF), Nottingham Clavicle Score (NCS), ACJI Score, Sick Scapula Score (SSS), Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Subjective Shoulder Test (SST), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) score, and the visual analog scale pain score. Radiologic follow-up was obtained pre- and postoperatively and at final follow-up. The 2-year results were compared to the results of a 1:1 matched-pair group comprising patients who were treated with an acute ACJI during the same period.

RESULTS

Thirty-three (80.5%) of 41 chronic ACJI cases were available for follow-up and were compared with 33 matched-pair cases of acute ACJI (of 41). The clinical scores were significantly better in the acute cohort for the CMS (92 ± 8 vs. 88 ± 8, P = .030), ASES (91 ± 13 vs. 85 ± 13, P = .002), SSS (1.4 ± 1.6 vs. 3.4 ± 2.5, P = .0004), NCS (86 ± 13 vs. 81 ± 13, P = .049), TF (9.9 ± 1.9 vs. 9.0 ± 2.1, P = .030), and ACJI (83 ± 13 vs. 75 ± 1, P = .003). In contrast to the chronic cohort, the acute cohort illustrated a significant loss of reduction at follow-up (P = .020).

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of this study, early arthroscopy-assisted operative treatment of grade IIIb and V ACJIs seems superior to delayed surgical intervention of grade IIIb and V ACJIs. Furthermore, an additional autograft loop leads to less loss of reduction compared with suture pulley/suspensory loop fixation standalones.

The German version of the Nottingham Clavicle Score is a reliable and valid patient-reported outcome measure to evaluate patients with clavicle and acromioclavicular pathologies

PURPOSE

The Nottingham Clavicle Score (NCS) is a patient-reported outcome measure developed to evaluate treatment results of clavicle, acromioclavicular and sternoclavicular joint pathologies. Valid, reliable and user-friendly translations of outcome measure instruments are needed to allow comparisons of international results. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to translate and adapt the NCS into German and evaluate the psychometric properties of the German version.

METHODS

The translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the NCS were completed using a 'translation-back translation" method and the final version was administered to 105 German-speaking patients. The psychometric properties of this version (NCS-G) were evaluated in terms of feasibility, reliability, validity and sensitivity to change.

RESULTS

No major differences occurred between the NCS translations into German and back into English, and no content- or linguistic-related difficulties were reported. The Cronbach's alpha for the NCS-G was 0.885, showing optimal internal consistency. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient for test-retest reliability was 0.907 (95% CI 0.844-0.945), with a standard error of measurement of 5.59 points and a minimal detectable change of 15.50 points. The NCS-G showed moderate to strong correlation with all other investigated scales (Spearman correlation coefficient: qDASH: ρ =  - 0.751; OSS: ρ = 0.728; Imatani Score: ρ = 0.646; CMS: ρ = 0.621; VAS: ρ =  - 0.709). Good sensitivity to change was confirmed by an effect size of 1.17 (95% CI 0.89-1.47) and a standardized response mean of 1.23 (95% CI 0.98-1.45).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that NCS-G is reliable, valid, reproducible and well accepted by patients, showing analogous psychometric properties to the original English version.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.