Z Orthop Unfall 2019; 157(05): 534-539
DOI: 10.1055/a-0805-5972
Original Article/Originalarbeit
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Postoperative Outcome of a New Shoulder Orthesis after Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: a Prospective, Randomized Observational Study

Article in several languages: English | deutsch
Patrick Ziegler
1   Klinik für Unfall- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie der Eberhard-Karls-Universität, BG Unfallklinik Tübingen
,
Fabian Stuby
1   Klinik für Unfall- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie der Eberhard-Karls-Universität, BG Unfallklinik Tübingen
,
Markus Alexander Küper
1   Klinik für Unfall- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie der Eberhard-Karls-Universität, BG Unfallklinik Tübingen
,
Thomas Greschner
1   Klinik für Unfall- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie der Eberhard-Karls-Universität, BG Unfallklinik Tübingen
,
Ulrich Stöckle
1   Klinik für Unfall- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie der Eberhard-Karls-Universität, BG Unfallklinik Tübingen
,
Markus Gühring
2   Klinik im Kronprinzenbau, Chirurgische Klinik, Reutlingen
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
23 January 2019 (online)

Abstract

Background Rotator cuff tears are one of the most frequently treated disorders in arthroscopic surgery. Besides the different surgical options, there are differences in the postoperative aftercare. In this observational study the function, handling and comfort of two different ortheses (ADVAGOshoulder vs. standard abduction orthesis) were compared.

Patients and Methods 53 patients with a rotator cuff tear (n = 25 ADVAGOshoulder, n = 28 standard abduction orthesis) were examined and questioned before and after the surgical treatment based on the DASH Score, a modified Constant Score, the function, handling and everyday practicality of their orthesis.

Results The ADVAGOshoulder orthesis showed favorable results concerning the limitations of daily activity, quality of sleep and limitations in movement. The assessment by the patients regarding the contribution to therapeutic success was also more pronounced with ADVAGOshoulder. The standard abduction orthesis was assessed twice as good as the ADVAGOshoulder orthesis in relation to the overall success of treatment. Regarding the DASH questionnaires no significant differences were seen between the two groups.

Conclusion Both ortheses proved to be a suitable tool for immobilization of the shoulder after surgery, and contributed to the success of treatment, as assessed by the patients. The ADVAGOshoulder orthesis showed advantages related to limitations in movement and quality of sleep compared to the standard abduction orthesis.

 
  • References/Literatur

  • 1 Piper CC, Hughes AJ, Ma Y. et al. Operative versus nonoperative treatment for the management of full-thickness rotator cuff tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2018; 27: 572-576
  • 2 Enger M, Skjaker SA, Melhuus K. et al. Shoulder injuries from birth to old age: a 1-year prospective study of 3031 shoulder injuries in an urban population. Injury 2018; DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2018.05.013.
  • 3 Zuckerman JD, Kummer FJ, Cuomo F. et al. The influence of coracoacromial arch anatomy on rotator cuff tears. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 1992; 1: 4-14
  • 4 Sher JS, Uribe JW, Posada A. et al. Abnormal findings on magnetic resonance images of asymptomatic shoulders. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995; 77: 10-15
  • 5 Lädermann A, Burkhart SS, Hoffmeyer P. et al. Classification of full-thickness rotator cuff lesions: a review. EFORT Open Rev 2017; 1: 420-430
  • 6 Petri M, Ettinger M, Brand S. et al. Non-operative management of rotator cuff tears. Open Orthop J 2016; 10: 349-356
  • 7 Depres-Tremblay G, Chevrier A, Snow M. et al. Rotator cuff repair: a review of surgical techniques, animal models, and new technologies under development. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2016; 25: 2078-2085
  • 8 Thigpen CA, Shaffer MA, Gaunt BW. et al. The American Society of Shoulder and Elbow Therapistsʼ consensus statement on rehabilitation following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2016; 25: 521-535
  • 9 Hsu JE, Horneff JG, Gee AO. Immobilization after rotator cuff repair: what evidence do we have now?. Orthop Clin North Am 2016; 47: 169-177
  • 10 Millett PJ, Wilcox 3rd RB, OʼHolleran JD. et al. Rehabilitation of the rotator cuff: an evaluation-based approach. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2006; 14: 599-609
  • 11 Gumina S, Candela V, Passaretti D. et al. Does immobilization position after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair impact work quality or comfort?. Musculoskelet Surg 2014; 98 (Suppl. 01) S55-S59
  • 12 Hollman F, Wolterbeek N, Zijl JAC. et al. Abduction brace versus antirotation sling after arthroscopic cuff repair: the effects on pain and function. Arthroscopy 2017; 33: 1618-1626
  • 13 Conti M, Garofalo R, Castagna A. Does a brace influence clinical outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair?. Musculoskelet Surg 2015; 99 (Suppl. 01) S31-S35
  • 14 Parsons BO, Gruson KI, Chen DD. et al. Does slower rehabilitation after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair lead to long-term stiffness?. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010; 19: 1034-1039
  • 15 Klintberg IH, Gunnarsson AC, Svantesson U. et al. Early loading in physiotherapy treatment after full-thickness rotator cuff repair: a prospective randomized pilot-study with a two-year follow-up. Clin Rehabil 2009; 23: 622-638
  • 16 Gallagher BP, Bishop ME, Tjoumakaris FP. et al. Early versus delayed rehabilitation following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a systematic review. Phys Sportsmed 2015; 43: 178-187