Effect of arthroscopic rotator cuff surgery in patients with preoperative restricted range of motion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of rotator cuff (RC) decompression and/or repair on post-operative ROM in patients with pre-operative restricted passive motion who had undergone arthroscopic subacromial debridement and/or rotator cuff repair. Potential predictors of ROM recovery such as age, sex, mechanism of injury, type of surgery, presence of an endocrine illness and having an active Worker Compensation claim related to the shoulder were explored. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed. Pre-operative stiffness measured intra-operatively was defined as flexion of < =100° or external rotation of < =30° under anesthesia. Patients who received manipulation under anesthesia or required capsular release were excluded. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighteen patients met the criteria for having stiffness under anesthesia. Twenty six patients had stiffness in both directions, 19 patients had isolated restricted flexion and 173 had isolated restricted external rotation. At six months post-operatively, a statistically significant improvement was observed on average in all disability measures (P < 0.0001). The ROM improved on average in the restricted direction at 6 months (p < 0.0001). Older age had a negative impact on recovery of external rotation (F2,216 = -5.78, p = 0.02). Being a female, having a traumatic event, having a RC repair, or suffering from an endocrine illness such as diabetes, did not have a negative impact on recovery. Patients with an active work-related compensation claim showed an inferior recovery of flexion (F2,216 = -8.76, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Patients with RC pathology and concomitant stiffness showed significant improvement in ROM at six months following RC decompression or repair without the need for formal capsular releases or the performance of manipulation under anesthesia. Older patients and those with active Workers Compensation claim showed an inferior recovery in isolated directions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".