Abstract
Introduction: In the evaluation of the major joints, self assessment tools have become wide spread aiming at a more precise quantification of joint function. Different tools have been developed for the elbow joint. However, there are only few data on the relationship between subjective self-assessment of joint function and objective measures.
We developed a comprehensive assessment set for the evaluation of subjective elbow function and objective clinical findings and investigate long-term results after implantation of GSB III Elbow arthroplasties in a first study. The PREE-G was cross-culturally adapted, following the recommendations of the American Association of Orthopedic Surgeons.
Material and Methods: 79 patients (56 female, 23 male, mean age 64 years) after elbow arthroplasty between 1984 and 1996 due to rheumatoid (59) or posttraumatic (20) arthritis underwent an assessment of the joint function using the PREE, the Short Form 36 (SF-36), the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, Hand (DASH)) and the modified American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (mASES) for a clinical evaluation. In 62 patients implantation was performed unilaterally and in 17 patients bilaterally, resulting in 96 elbow joints altogether. The mean follow up time was 11,2 years
Results: In the SF-36 score, the mean physical component scale (PCS) was worse (37,2 vs 41,7, p=0,004), the mean mental component scale (MCS) better (52,3 vs 50,3, p=0,092) than normative values of a German population. Subjective assessment by the PREE revealed a mean of 66,8, by the mASES of 63,1 and by the DASH of 56,5 points. Clinical examination resulted in a mean mASES score of 71,6 points. Comparison between the patients self assessment and the objective score revealed a significant correlation between the DASH (r=0,46, p< 0,001), PREE (p=0,54, p< 0,001) and mASES (r=0,60, p< 0,001) with the clinical mASES. In contrast, no significant correlation was found between the physical component scale (PCS) and mental component scale (MCS) of SF-36 and the clinical mASES. Also the patients assessment scores DASH, PREE and mASES showed a strong significant correlation among one another (r=0,74–0,92, p< 0,001) and (PCS) (r=0,58–0,75, p< 0,001) but not with the (MCS) of SF-36.
Conclusion: Assessment of long term results after elbow arthroplasty yielded favourable clinical and subjective results. The clinical outcome tended to be higher than results of the patient self-rated scores. Hereby, the newly developed assessment set proved to be a feasible tool for a comprehensive assessment of elbow function. In addition to clinical outcome assessment, with this set it is possible to gain important and new insights on the relationship between objective measures and subjective patients-assessment of elbow disorders and postoperative conditions.
Theses abstracts were prepared by Professor Roger Lemaire. Correspondence should be addressed to EFORT Central Office, Freihofstrasse 22, CH-8700 Küsnacht, Switzerland.
