Shoulder Surgery Postoperative Immobilization: An International Survey of Shoulder Surgeons
Author:
Freehill Michael T.1, Murray Iain R.23, Calvo Emilio4ORCID, Lädermann Alexandre567ORCID, Srikumaran Uma8
Affiliation:
1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Redwood City, CA 94305, USA 2. Edinburgh Orthopaedics, The Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK 3. The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH8 9JU, UK 4. Shoulder and Elbow Reconstructive Surgery Unit, Orthopaedic Surgery and Trauma Department, Fundación Jiménez Díaz University Hospital, Universidad Autonoma, 28040 Madrid, Spain 5. La Tour Hospital, University of Geneva, Geneva University Hospitals, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland 6. Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland 7. Division of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Department of Surgery, Geneva University Hospitals, 1217 Geneva, Switzerland 8. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, John Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA
Abstract
Background: There is currently no consensus on immobilization protocols following shoulder surgery. The aim of this study was to establish patterns and types of sling use for various surgical procedures in the United States (US) and Europe, and to identify factors associated with the variations. Methods: An online survey was sent to all members of the American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) and European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow (ESSSE). The survey gathered member data, including practice location and years in practice. It also obtained preferences for the type and duration of sling use after the following surgical procedures: arthroscopic Bankart repair, Latarjet, arthroscopic superior/posterosuperior rotator cuff repair (ARCR) of tears <3 cm and >3 cm, anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) and reverse TSA (rTSA), and isolated biceps tenodesis (BT). Relationships between physician location and sling type for each procedure were analyzed using Fisher’s exact tests and post-hoc tests using Bonferroni-adjusted p-values. Relationships looking at years in practice and sling duration preferred were analyzed using Spearman’s correlation tests. Results: In total, 499 surgeons with a median of 15 years of experience (IQR = 9–25) responded, with 54.7% from the US and 45.3% from Europe. US respondents reported higher abduction pillow sling use than European respondents for the following: Bankart repair (62% vs. 15%, p < 0.0001), Latarjet (53% vs. 12%, p < 0.001), ARCR < 3 cm (80% vs. 42%, p < 0.001) and >3 cm (84% vs. 61%, p < 0.001), aTSA (50% vs. 21%, p < 0.001) and rTSA with subscapularis repair (61% vs. 22%, p < 0.001) and without subscapularis repair (57% vs. 17%, p < 0.001), and isolated BT (18% vs. 7%, p = 0.006). European respondents reported higher simple sling use than US respondents for the following: Bankart repair (74% vs. 31%, p < 0.001), Latarjet (78% vs. 44%, p < 0.001), ARCR < 3 cm (50% vs. 17%, p < 0.001) and >3 cm (34% vs. 13%, p < 0.001), and aTSA (69% vs. 41%, p < 0.001) and rTSA with subscapularis repair (70% vs. 35%, p < 0.001) and without subscapularis repair (73% vs. 39%, p < 0.001). Increasing years of experience demonstrated a negative correlation with the duration of sling use after Bankart repair (r = −0.20, p < 0.001), Latarjet (r = −0.25, p < 0.001), ARCR < 3 cm (r = −0.14, p = 0.014) and >3 cm (r = −0.20, p < 0.002), and aTSA (r = −0.37, p < 0.001), and rTSA with subscapularis repair (r = −0.10, p = 0.049) and without subscapularis repair (r = −0.19, p = 0.022. Thus, the more experienced surgeons tended to recommend shorter durations of post-operative sling use. US surgeons reported longer post-operative sling durations for Bankart repair (4.8 vs. 4.1 weeks, p < 0.001), Latarjet (4.6 vs. 3.6 weeks, p < 0.001), ARCR < 3 cm (5.2 vs. 4.5 weeks p < 0.001) and >3 cm (5.9 vs. 5.1 weeks, p < 0.001), aTSA (4.9 vs. 4.3 weeks, p < 0.001), rTSR without subscapularis repair (4.0 vs. 3.6 weeks, p = 0.031), and isolated BT (3.7 vs. 3.3 weeks, p = 0.012) than Europe respondents. No significant differences between regions within the US and Europe were demonstrated. Conclusions: There is considerable variation in the immobilization advocated by surgeons, with geographic location and years of clinical experience influencing patterns of sling use. Future work is required to establish the most clinically beneficial protocols for immobilization following shoulder surgery. Level of Evidence: Level IV.
Subject
General Agricultural and Biological Sciences,General Immunology and Microbiology,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Reference30 articles.
1. Jain, N.B., Higgins, L.D., Losina, E., Collins, J., Blazar, P.E., and Katz, J.N. (2014). Epidemiology of musculoskeletal upper extremity ambulatory surgery in the United States. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., 15. 2. Serious adverse events and lifetime risk of reoperation after elective shoulder replacement: Population based cohort study using hospital episode statistics for England;Craig;BMJ (Clin. Res. Ed.),2019 3. Vidal, C., Lira, M.J., de Marinis, R., Liendo, R., and Contreras, J.J. (2021). Increasing incidence of rotator cuff surgery: A nationwide registry study in Chile. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., 22. 4. Arthroscopic Versus Mini-open Rotator Cuff Repair: A Randomized Trial and Meta-analysis;MacDermid;Am. J. Sport. Med.,2021 5. Bridging Allograft Reconstruction Is Superior to Maximal Repair for the Treatment of Chronic, Massive Rotator Cuff Tears: Results of a Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial;Wong;Am. J. Sport. Med.,2021
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|