MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964691027 · doi:10.5435/jaaos-d-19-00166

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes After Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty and Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients 70 Years and Older With Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis and an Intact Rotator Cuff

2019· article· en· W2964691027 on OpenAlex
Melissa A. Wright, Jay D. Keener, Aaron M. Chamberlain

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRotator cuffArthroplastyVisual analogue scaleOsteoarthritisOrthopedic surgeryElbowSurgeryRange of motionPatient satisfactionRetrospective cohort studyComplicationCohortArthropathyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: As the indications for reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) expand beyond traditional cuff tear arthropathy, the role of RSA in elderly patients with glenohumeral arthritis and an intact rotator cuff remains unclear. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 135 patients who underwent RSA or total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) at a single tertiary orthopedic center between 2005 and 2015 and were 70 years of age or older at the time of surgery. All patients had preoperative advanced imaging confirming an intact rotator cuff but active forward elevation less than 90°. Complications, reoperations, and patient survival were recorded from the medical record. Patient-reported outcomes (Pain visual analog scale, Satisfaction Score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES], and Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder [WOOS]) and patient-reported range of motion were collected at a minimum of 2 years after procedure. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in complication rate or revision surgery rate between patients undergoing TSA and RSA (complications 13.7% versus 12.1%, P = 0.810; reoperations 6.9% vs 3.0%, P = 0.418). There were no differences in patient-reported outcome measures between the two groups. Mean pain visual analog scale scores were low in both groups (0.72, SD 1.93 for TSA and 0.31, SD 0.72 for RSA). Satisfaction scores were high (86.1, SD 23.3 for TSA and 91.8, SD 9.0 for RSA, P = 0.286). Mean ASES and WOOS scores were also high in both groups (86 [SD 15.6] for TSA and 83 [SD 12.6] for RSA for ASES [P = 0.400] and 86 [SD 18.3] for TSA and 89 [SD 10.2] for RSA for WOOS [P = 0.400]). One hundred percent of subjects following RSA and 98% of subjects following TSA rated their forward elevation as full or nearly full (>135°) (P = 0.516). DISCUSSION: Given the good clinical outcomes after both TSA and RSA, there may be an increased role for RSA in this elderly cohort to provide effective treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.330 · 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