MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293152720 · doi:10.1016/j.jseint.2022.07.009

Patient reported outcomes and ranges of motion after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with and without subscapularis repair

2022· article· en· W4293152720 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sameer R. Oak, Evangeline Kobayashi, Joel Gagnier, Patrick J. Denard, Benjamin W. Sears, Reuben Gobezie, Evan Lederman, Brian C. Werner, Asheesh Bedi, Bruce S. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueJSES International · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersArthrex
KeywordsMedicineArthroplastyRange of motionElbowImplantDemographicsSurgeryCohortOrthodonticsPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In performing reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA), the role of repairing the subscapularis has been debated. Our objective was to determine the effect of subscapularis repair following rTSA on postoperative shoulder ranges of motion and patient reported outcome scores (PROs). Methods: A prospective registry was reviewed to establish a cohort of primary rTSA patients with a 135-degree humeral implant, with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Variables collected included demographics, subscapularis repair information, diagnosis, glenosphere size, and glenoid lateralization information. Outcomes collected were range of motion measurements, subscapularis strength, and multiple generic and shoulder PROs. Multivariable linear regression models were created to predict these 2-year outcomes. Results: The 143-patient cohort had a mean age of 69 years with 68% of patients undergoing subscapularis repair. After adjustment in the multivariable models, whether the subscapularis was repaired did not significantly predict a 2-year forward elevation, external rotation, internal rotation, subscapularis strength, Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder score, VR-12 scores, Constant Score, or American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Scores. Increased glenoid lateralization significantly predicted greater internal rotation, higher VR-12 physical score, and higher Constant Score. There were no dislocations in either group. Conclusions: After adjusting for patient and implant factors, subscapularis repair was not associated with a 2-year postoperative range of motion, strength, or any PROs suggesting that repairing the subscapularis may not affect functional outcome. Increased glenoid lateralization through the baseplate and glenosphere independently predicted better internal rotation, VR-12 physical score, and Constant Scores indicating a benefit to lateralization during rTSA.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJSES InternationalSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207