Treatment of Shoulder Osteoarthritis With Intact Rotator Cuff and Severe Glenoid Retroversion

Abstract

The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons has developed an Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for Treatment of Shoulder Osteoarthritis with Intact Rotator Cuff and Severe Glenoid Retroversion. Evidence-based information, in conjunction with the clinical expertise of physicians, was used to develop the criteria to determine the appropriateness of various treatments of shoulder osteoarthritis with intact rotator cuff and severe glenoid retroversion. The AUC for Treatment of Shoulder Osteoarthritis with Intact Rotator Cuff and Severe Glenoid Retroversion were derived by identifying scenarios evident during the clinical decision-making process on this topic. These scenarios relied on definitions and general assumptions, mutually agreed upon by the writing panel during scenario development. These definitions and assumptions were necessary to provide consistency in the interpretation of the clinical scenarios among experts rating the scenarios and readers using the final criteria. Writing panel members of this AUC developed patient scenarios using these guiding principles: comprehensive (covers a wide range of patients), mutually exclusive (no overlap between patient scenarios/indications), homogeneous (final ratings should result in equal application in each of the patient scenarios), and manageable (number of total rating items [ie, number of patient scenarios × number of treatments] should be practical for the rating panel). The target number of total rating items was <1,500. This means that not all patient indications and treatments can be assessed using AUC. A total of 240 patient scenarios and five treatments were developed by the writing panel, a group of clinicians who are specialists in this AUC topic. Next, a separate, multidisciplinary, rating panel (made up of specialists and non-specialists) rated the appropriateness of treatment of each patient scenario using a nine-point scale to designate a treatment as “appropriate” (median rating, 7 to 9), “may be appropriate” (median rating, 4 to 6), or “rarely appropriate” (median rating, 1 to 3).