Patient-Reported and Objectively Measured Function Before and After Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty

Applications of wearable sensors in upper extremity MSK conditions: a scoping review

PURPOSE

This scoping review uniquely aims to map the current state of the literature on the applications of wearable sensors in people with or at risk of developing upper extremity musculoskeletal (UE-MSK) conditions, considering that MSK conditions or disorders have the highest rate of prevalence among other types of conditions or disorders that contribute to the need for rehabilitation services.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews guideline was followed in this scoping review. Two independent authors conducted a systematic search of four databases, including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and IEEEXplore. We included studies that have applied wearable sensors on people with or at risk of developing UE-MSK condition published after 2010. We extracted study designs, aims, number of participants, sensor placement locations, sensor types, and number, and outcome(s) of interest from the included studies. The overall findings of our scoping review are presented in tables and diagrams to map an overview of the existing applications.

RESULTS

The final review encompassed 80 studies categorized into clinical population (31 studies), workers' population (31 studies), and general wearable design/performance studies (18 studies). Most were observational, with 2 RCTs in workers' studies. Clinical studies focused on UE-MSK conditions like rotator cuff tear and arthritis. Workers' studies involved industrial workers, surgeons, farmers, and at-risk healthy individuals. Wearable sensors were utilized for objective motion assessment, home-based rehabilitation monitoring, daily activity recording, physical risk characterization, and ergonomic assessments. IMU sensors were prevalent in designs (84%), with a minority including sEMG sensors (16%). Assessment applications dominated (80%), while treatment-focused studies constituted 20%. Home-based applicability was noted in 21% of the studies.

CONCLUSION

Wearable sensor technologies have been increasingly applied to the health care field. These applications include clinical assessments, home-based treatments of MSK disorders, and monitoring of workers' population in non-standardized areas such as work environments. Assessment-focused studies predominate over treatment studies. Additionally, wearable sensor designs predominantly use IMU sensors, with a subset of studies incorporating sEMG and other sensor types in wearable platforms to capture muscle activity and inertial data for the assessment or rehabilitation of MSK conditions.

Substantial Inconsistency and Variability Exists Among Minimum Clinically Important Differences for Shoulder Arthroplasty Outcomes: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

As the value of patient-reported outcomes becomes increasingly recognized, minimum clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds have seen greater use in shoulder arthroplasty. However, MCIDs are unique to certain populations, and variation in the modes of calculation in this field may be of concern. With the growing utilization of MCIDs within the field and value-based care models, a detailed appraisal of the appropriateness of MCID use in the literature is necessary and has not been systematically reviewed.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We performed a systematic review of MCID quantification in existing studies on shoulder arthroplasty to answer the following questions: (1) What is the range of values reported for the MCID in commonly used shoulder arthroplasty patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)? (2) What percentage of studies use previously existing MCIDs versus calculating a new MCID? (3) What techniques for calculating the MCID were used in studies where a new MCID was calculated?

METHODS

The Embase, PubMed, and Ovid/MEDLINE databases were queried from December 2008 through December 2020 for total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty articles reporting an MCID value for various PROMs. Two reviewers (DAK, MAM) independently screened articles for eligibility, specifically identifying articles that reported MCID values for PROMs after shoulder arthroplasty, and extracted data for analysis. Each study was classified into two categories: those referencing a previously defined MCID and those using a newly calculated MCID. Methods for determining the MCID for each study and the variability of reported MCIDs for each PROM were recorded. The number of patients, age, gender, BMI, length of follow-up, surgical indications, and surgical type were extracted for each article. Forty-three articles (16,408 patients) with a mean (range) follow-up of 20 months (0.75 to 68) met the inclusion criteria. The median (range) BMI of patients was 29.3 kg/m2 (28.0 to 32.2 kg/m2), and the median (range) age was 68 years (53 to 84). There were 17 unique PROMs with MCID values. Of the 112 MCIDs reported, the most common PROMs with MCIDs were the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) (23% [26 of 112]), the Simple Shoulder Test (SST) (17% [19 of 112]), and the Constant (15% [17 of 112]).

RESULTS

The ranges of MCID values for each PROM varied widely (ASES: 6.3 to 29.5; SST: 1.4 to 4.0; Constant: -0.3 to 12.8). Fifty-six percent (24 of 43) of studies used previously established MCIDs, with 46% (11 of 24) citing one study. Forty-four percent (19 of 43) of studies established new MCIDs, and the most common technique was anchor-based (37% [7 of 19]), followed by distribution (21% [4 of 19]).

CONCLUSION

There is substantial inconsistency and variability in the quantification and reporting of MCID values in shoulder arthroplasty studies. Many shoulder arthroplasty studies apply previously published MCID values with variable ranges of follow-up rather than calculating population-specific thresholds. The use of previously calculated MCIDs may be acceptable in specific situations; however, investigators should select an anchor-based MCID calculated from a patient population as similar as possible to their own. This practice is preferable to the use of distribution-approach MCID methods. Alternatively, authors may consider using substantial clinical benefit or patient-acceptable symptom state to assess outcomes after shoulder arthroplasty.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Although MCIDs may provide a useful effect-size based alternative to the traditional p value, care must be taken to use an MCID that is appropriate for the particular patient population being studied.

Quantifying shoulder activity after rotator cuff repair: Technique and preliminary results

Repair tissue healing after rotator cuff repair remains a significant clinical problem, and excessive shoulder activity after surgical repair is believed to contribute to re-tears. In contrast, small animal studies have demonstrated that complete removal of activity impairs tendon healing and have advocated for an "appropriate" level of activity, but in humans the appropriate amount of shoulder activity to enhance healing is not known. As an initial step toward understanding the relationship between postoperative shoulder activity and repair tissue healing, the objectives of this study were to assess the precision, accuracy, and feasibility of a wrist-worn triaxial accelerometer for measuring shoulder activity. Following assessments of precision (±0.002 g) and accuracy (±0.006 g), feasibility was assessed by measuring 1 week of shoulder activity in 14 rotator cuff repair patients and 8 control subjects. Shoulder activity was reported in terms of volume (mean acceleration, activity count, mean activity index, active time) and intensity (intensity gradient). Patients had significantly less volume (p ≤ .03) and intensity (p = .01) than controls. Time post-surgery was significantly associated with the volume (p ≤ .05 for mean acceleration, activity count, and mean activity index) and intensity (p = .03) of shoulder activity, but not active time (p = .08). These findings indicate this approach has the accuracy and precision necessary to continuously monitor shoulder activity with a wrist-worn sensor. The preliminary data demonstrate the ability to discriminate between healthy control subjects and patients recovering from rotator cuff repair and provide support for using a wearable sensor to monitor changes over time in shoulder activity.

A novel instrumented shoulder functional test using wearable sensors in patients with brachial plexus injury

BACKGROUND

Because nerve injury of muscles around the shoulder can be easily disguised by "trick movements" of the trunk, shoulder dysfunction following brachial plexus injury is difficult to quantify with conventional clinical tools. Thus, to evaluate brachial plexus injury and quantify its biomechanical consequences, we used inertial measurement units, which offer the sensitivity required to measure the trunk's subtle movements.

METHODS

We calculated 6 kinematic scores using inertial measurement units placed on the upper arms and the trunk during 9 functional tasks. We used both statistical and machine learning techniques to compare the bilateral asymmetry of the kinematic scores of 15 affected and 15 able-bodied individuals (controls).

RESULTS

Asymmetry indexes from several kinematic scores of the upper arm and trunk showed a significant difference (P < .05) between the affected and control groups. A bagged ensemble of decision trees trained with trunk and upper arm kinematic scores correctly classified all controls. All but 2 patients were also correctly classified. Upper arm scores showed correlation coefficients ranging from 0.55-0.76 with conventional clinical scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed wearable technology is a sensitive and reliable tool for objective outcome evaluation of brachial plexus injury and its biomechanical consequences. It may be useful in clinical research and practice, especially in large cohorts with multiple follow-ups.

Accelerometry evaluation of shoulder movement and its association with patient-reported and clinical outcomes following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Accelerometers provide a new method to objectively measure recovery of movement and physical activity in patients following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) and may overcome common limitations associated with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The aim of this study was to assess changes in upper limb movement using accelerometers following RTSA and investigate their association with other clinical outcome measures.

METHODS

Thirty-six patients who underwent RTSA wore accelerometers on both wrists and arms for 3 days at 3, 6, and 12 months postsurgery. PROMs (Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, visual analog scale for pain, Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation, Shoulder Activity Level) and isometric shoulder strength were also assessed. Accelerometer outcomes were calculated to quantify counts of forearm and arm activity and the contribution of both arms to activity (limb symmetry and magnitude ratio). Changes and differences in all clinical measures and objective movement measures were evaluated with within-subjects analysis of variance. Correlations between limb activity and other clinical measures were investigated using Spearman correlation coefficients.

RESULTS

Objective movement of the operated arm increased from 3-6 months postsurgery (P = .004), but not from 6-12 months (P = .240). Limb asymmetries were observed at 3 and 6 months and improved by 12 months postsurgery. No associations were demonstrated between PROMs and objective upper limb movement at 12 months postsurgery.

DISCUSSION

Despite early recovery of function and pain relief assessed by PROMs, objective movement using accelerometers showed delayed recovery of the operated arm postoperatively, before normalizing by 12 months postsurgery. Accelerometers provide a unique insight into functional recovery following RTSA.

Physical therapy and precision rehabilitation in shoulder rotator cuff disease

PURPOSE

To describe the main features of the rehabilitation protocols for RC disease based on the phases of tendon healing and to investigate about the use of wearable devices as monitoring systems.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search of PubMed, Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, and EMBASE databases using various combination of the keywords "rotator cuff," "rotator cuff tear," "rehabilitation protocol," "accelerated," "conservative," "stiffness," "exercises," and "wearable devices." All articles concerning precision orthopaedic rehabilitation therapy in rotator cuff disease were retrieved.

RESULTS

To date, rehabilitation protocols are not comparable due to wide heterogeneity of RC diseases. Wearable technologies are becoming a revolutionary tool for movement and posture monitoring.

CONCLUSION

Rehabilitation protocols for RC disease should be tailored on the basis of the different phases of tendon healing. Wearable devices hold the promise to offer a new outlook for long-term follow-up during the postoperative period providing information to the clinician about patient's status.

Wearable systems for shoulder kinematics assessment: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Wearable sensors are acquiring more and more influence in diagnostic and rehabilitation field to assess motor abilities of people with neurological or musculoskeletal impairments. The aim of this systematic literature review is to analyze the wearable systems for monitoring shoulder kinematics and their applicability in clinical settings and rehabilitation.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar and IEEE Xplore was performed and results were included up to July 2019. All studies concerning wearable sensors to assess shoulder kinematics were retrieved.

RESULTS

Seventy-three studies were included because they have fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The results showed that magneto and/or inertial sensors are the most used. Wearable sensors measuring upper limb and/or shoulder kinematics have been proposed to be applied in patients with different pathological conditions such as stroke, multiple sclerosis, osteoarthritis, rotator cuff tear. Sensors placement and method of attachment were broadly heterogeneous among the examined studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Wearable systems are a promising solution to provide quantitative and meaningful clinical information about progress in a rehabilitation pathway and to extrapolate meaningful parameters in the diagnosis of shoulder pathologies. There is a strong need for development of this novel technologies which undeniably serves in shoulder evaluation and therapy.