MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073052379 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.d.02854

A Comparison of Pain, Strength, Range of Motion, and Functional Outcomes After Hemiarthroplasty and Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients with Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder

2005· review· en· W2073052379 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsFowler Kennedy Sport Medicine ClinicWestern UniversityMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArthroplastyRange of motionOsteoarthritisPhysical therapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A systematic review of the literature was performed to estimate the impact of hemiarthroplasty compared with total shoulder arthroplasty on function and range of motion in patients suffering from osteoarthritis of the shoulder. METHODS: We conducted an electronic search for relevant studies published in any language from 1966 to 2004, a manual search of the proceedings from five major orthopaedic meetings from 1995 to 2003, and a review of the reference lists from potentially relevant studies. Four randomized clinical trials, with similar eligibility criteria and surgical techniques, that compared hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the shoulder were found to be eligible. Authors from three of the four studies provided original patient data. Analysis of covariance focused on the two-year outcome and included a comparison of the aggregate University of California at Los Angeles shoulder score, four University of California at Los Angeles domain scores, and range of motion. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients (fifty managed with hemiarthroplasty and sixty-two managed with total shoulder arthroplasty), who had a mean age of sixty-eight years, were included in this analysis. A significant moderate effect was detected in the function domain of the University of California at Los Angeles shoulder score (p < 0.001) in favor of total shoulder arthroplasty (mean [and standard deviation], 8.1 +/- 0.3) compared with hemiarthroplasty (mean, 6.6 +/- 0.3). A significant difference in the pain score was found in favor of the total shoulder arthroplasty group (p < 0.0001). However, the large degree of heterogeneity (p = 0.006, I(2) = 80.2%) among the studies decreased our confidence that total shoulder arthroplasty provides a true, consistent benefit with regard to pain. There was a significant difference in the overall change in forward elevation of 13 degrees (95% confidence interval, 0.5 degrees to 26 degrees ) in favor of the total shoulder arthroplasty group (p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: At a minimum of two years of follow-up, total shoulder arthroplasty provided better functional outcome than hemiarthroplasty for patients with osteoarthritis of the shoulder. Since continuous degeneration of the glenoid after hemiarthroplasty or glenoid loosening after total shoulder arthroplasty may affect the eventual outcome, longer-term (five to ten-year) results are necessary to determine whether these findings remain consistent over time.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.259 · 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