MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027792452 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.d.02198

Quality-of-Life Outcome Following Hemiarthroplasty or Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients with Osteoarthritis<sbt aid="960772">A Prospective, Randomized Trial</sbt>

2005· article· en· W2027792452 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ian K.Y. Lo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityFowler Kennedy Sport Medicine Clinic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArthroplastyOsteoarthritisQuality of life (healthcare)Visual analogue scaleRandomized controlled trialSurgeryPhysical therapyRange of motionElbowNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Both total shoulder arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty have been used commonly to treat severe osteoarthritis of the shoulder; however, their effect on disease-specific quality-of-life outcome is unknown. The purpose of this study was to compare the quality-of-life outcome following hemiarthroplasty with that following total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis of the shoulder. METHODS: Forty-two patients with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis of the shoulder were randomized to receive a hemiarthroplasty or a total shoulder arthroplasty. One patient died, and all others were evaluated preoperatively and at six weeks and three, six, twelve, eighteen, and twenty-four months postoperatively with use of a standardized format including a disease-specific quality-of-life measurement tool (Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder [WOOS] index), general shoulder rating scales (University of California at Los Angeles [UCLA] shoulder scale, Constant score, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES] evaluation form), general pain scales (McGill pain score and visual analogue scale), and a global health measure (Short Form-36 [SF-36]). When a patient required revision of a hemiarthroplasty to a total shoulder arthroplasty, the last score before he or she "crossed over" was used for the analysis. RESULTS: Significant improvements in disease-specific quality of life were seen two years after both the total shoulder arthroplasties and the hemiarthroplasties. There were no significant differences in quality of life (WOOS score) between the group treated with total shoulder arthroplasty and that treated with hemiarthroplasty (90.6 +/- 13.2 and 81.5 +/- 24.1 points, respectively; p = 0.18). The other outcome measures demonstrated similar findings. Two patients in the hemiarthroplasty group crossed over to the other group by undergoing a revision to a total shoulder arthroplasty because of glenoid arthrosis. CONCLUSIONS: Both total shoulder arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty improve disease-specific and general quality-of-life measurements. With the small number of patients in our study, we found no significant differences in these measurements between the two treatment groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations212
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Joint SurgerySame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207