Outcome of Expedited Rotator Cuff Surgery in Injured Workers: Determinants of Successful Recovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Work-related rotator cuff injuries are a common cause of disability and employee time loss. Purpose: To examine the effectiveness of expedited rotator cuff surgery in injured workers who underwent rotator cuff decompression or repair and to explore the impact of demographic, clinical, and psychosocial factors in predicting the outcome of surgery. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Injured workers who were seen at a shoulder specialty program and who underwent expedited arthroscopic rotator cuff decompression or repair were observed for a period of 6 to 12 months based on their type of surgery and recovery trajectory. The primary outcome measure was the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form. The impact of surgery was assessed by whether the change in the ASES score exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 17 points. Secondary outcomes were range of motion (ROM), medication consumption, and work status. Results: One hundred forty-six patients (43 women [29%], 103 men [71%]; mean age, 52 years; SD, 8 years) completed the study. Sixty-seven (46%) patients underwent rotator cuff repair. The mean time between the date the patient consented to have surgery and the date of surgery was 82 (SD, 44) days. There was a statistically significant improvement in ASES score and ROM and work status (52 returned to regular duties and 59 to modified duties) ( P < .0001). Eighty-four percent (n = 122) of patients exceeded the MCID of 17 points. Individual factors that affected patient overall disability were preoperative ASES, work status prior to surgery, access to care, and autonomy at work. Achieving a minimal clinically meaningful change was influenced by perceived access to care, autonomy and stress at work, and overall satisfaction with the job. Conclusion: Expedited rotator cuff surgery improved disability, ROM, and work status in injured workers. Successful recovery after work-related shoulder injuries may further be facilitated by improving the psychosocial work environment and increasing access to care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".