The purpose of this prospective pilot study is to examine the feasibility of a physiotherapist led rapid access shoulder screening clinic (RASC). The goal of this study is to assess for improvements in patient access to care, patient reported outcome measures, patient reported experience measures, and cost outcomes using time driven activity based costing methods.

Patient recruitment began in January 2021. Consultation requests from general practitioners and emergency rooms are analyzed and triaged through a central system. One half of patients awaiting consultation were triaged to the traditional route used at our center while the other half were triaged to be assessed at the RASC. Outcome measures consisting of the Simple Shoulder Test and SF-12 were recorded at the initial consultation and at follow up appointments. Cost benefit analysis was conducted using time driven activity based costing methods (TD-ABC).

From January to August of 2021, 123 new patients were triaged for RASC assessment. On average, the RASC gets 10 new referrals per month. As of September 2021, there are 65 patients still on waitlist for RASC assessment with 58 having been assessed. Of the 58, 11% were discharged through the RASC, 48% pursued private physiotherapy, 14% had injections, 19% proceeded on for surgical consultation, and 8% did not show. Over time same time period, approximately 15 new patients were seen in consultation by the surgeon's office.

Thirty-five responses were obtained from RASC patients during their initial intake assessment. The average age of respondents was 54.7 with 21 females and 14 males. Median SF-12 scores in the physical dimension (PCS-12) for RASC patients were 36.82 and mental (MCS-12) 49.38927. Median Simple Shoulder Test scores measured 6. Of the patients who responded to the follow up questionnaires after completing physiotherapy at the RASC, both the SF-12 and Simple Shoulder Test scoring improved. Median PCS-12 measured 47.08, MCS-12 of 55.87, and Simple Shoulder Test measured 8.

RASC assessments by PT saved $172.91 per hour for consultation and $157.97 per hour for patient follow ups.

Utilization of a physiotherapy led rapid access shoulder clinic resulted in improvements in patient outcomes as measured by the SF-12 and Simple Shoulder Test as well as significant direct cost savings. Proper triage protocols to identify which patients would be suitable for RASC assessment, buy-in from physiotherapists, and timely assessment of patients for early initiation of rehabilitation for shoulder pain is paramount to the success of a RASC system at our centre. Future research direction would be geared to analyzing a larger dataset as it becomes available.

Compared to single-incision distal biceps repair (SI), double-incision repair (DI) theoretically allows for reattachment of the tendon to a more anatomically favorable position. We hypothesized that DI repair would result in greater terminal supination torque compared to SI repair for acute distal biceps ruptures.

In this retrospective cohort study, patients were included if they sustained an isolated, acute (° supinated position. Secondary outcomes included supination torque in 45° supinated, neutral, and 45° pronated positions, ASES elbow score, DASH, SF-12, and VAS. Power analysis revealed that at least 32 patients were needed to detect a minimum 15% difference in the primary outcome (β = 0.20). Statistical analysis was performed with significance level α = 0.05 using R version 3.4.1 (R Core Team 2017, Vienna, Austria).

Of 53 eligible patients, 37 consented to participate. Fifteen were repaired using DI technique and 22 using SI technique. Mean age was 47.3yrs and median follow-up time was 28.1months. The groups did not differ with respect to age, time-to-follow-up, dominance of arm affected, Workers Compensation or smoking status. Mean supination torque, measured as the percentage of the unaffected side, was 60.9% (95%CI 45.1–76.7) for DI repair versus 80.4% (95%CI 69.1–91.7) for SI repair at the 60°supinated position (p=0.036). There were no statistically significant differences in mean supination torque at the 45°supinated position: 67.1% (95%CI 49.4–84.7) for DI versus 81.8% (95%CI 72.2–91.4) for SI (p=0.102), at the neutral position: 88.8% (95%CI 75.2–102.4) for DI versus 97.6% (95%CI 91.6–103.7) for SI (p=0.0.170), and at the 45°pronated position: 104.5% (95%CI 91.1–117.9) for DI versus 103.4 (95%CI 97.2–109.6) for SI (p=0.0.862). No statistically significant differences were detected in the secondary outcomes ASES Pain, ASES Function, DASH scores, SF-12 PCS or MCS, or VAS Pain. A small difference was detected in VAS Function (median 1.3 for DI repair versus 0.5 for SI repair, p=0.023). In a multivariate linear regression model controlling for arm dominance, age, and follow-up time, SI repair was associated with a greater mean supination torque than DI repair by 19.6% at the 60°supinated position (p=0.011).

Contrary to our hypothesis, we found approximately a 20% mean improvement in terminal supination torque for acute distal biceps ruptures repaired with the single-incision technique compared to the double-incision technique. Patients uniformly did well with either technique, though we contend that this finding may have clinical significance for the more discerning, high-demand patient.

Compared to single-incision distal biceps repair (SI), double-incision repair (DI) theoretically allows for reattachment of the tendon to a more anatomically favorable position. We hypothesized that DI repair would result in greater terminal supination torque compared to SI repair for acute distal biceps ruptures.

In this retrospective cohort study, patients were included if they sustained an isolated, acute (° supinated position. Secondary outcomes included supination torque in 45° supinated, neutral, and 45° pronated positions, ASES elbow score, DASH, SF-12, and VAS. Power analysis revealed that at least 32 patients were needed to detect a minimum 15% difference in the primary outcome (β = 0.20). Statistical analysis was performed with significance level α = 0.05 using R version 3.4.1 (R Core Team 2017, Vienna, Austria).

Of 53 eligible patients, 37 consented to participate. Fifteen were repaired using DI technique and 22 using SI technique. Mean age was 47.3yrs and median follow-up time was 28.1months. The groups did not differ with respect to age, time-to-follow-up, dominance of arm affected, Workers Compensation or smoking status. Mean supination torque, measured as the percentage of the unaffected side, was 60.9% (95%CI 45.1–76.7) for DI repair versus 80.4% (95%CI 69.1–91.7) for SI repair at the 60°supinated position (p=0.036). There were no statistically significant differences in mean supination torque at the 45°supinated position: 67.1% (95%CI 49.4–84.7) for DI versus 81.8% (95%CI 72.2–91.4) for SI (p=0.102), at the neutral position: 88.8% (95%CI 75.2–102.4) for DI versus 97.6% (95%CI 91.6–103.7) for SI (p=0.0.170), and at the 45°pronated position: 104.5% (95%CI 91.1–117.9) for DI versus 103.4 (95%CI 97.2–109.6) for SI (p=0.0.862). No statistically significant differences were detected in the secondary outcomes ASES Pain, ASES Function, DASH scores, SF-12 PCS or MCS, or VAS Pain. A small difference was detected in VAS Function (median 1.3 for DI repair versus 0.5 for SI repair, p=0.023). In a multivariate linear regression model controlling for arm dominance, age, and follow-up time, SI repair was associated with a greater mean supination torque than DI repair by 19.6% at the 60°supinated position (p=0.011).

Contrary to our hypothesis, we found approximately a 20% mean improvement in terminal supination torque for acute distal biceps ruptures repaired with the single-incision technique compared to the double-incision technique. Patients uniformly did well with either technique, though we contend that this finding may have clinical significance for the more discerning, high-demand patient.

Treatment regimes for malignant disease have improved significantly in recent years leading to improved survival after diagnosis of primary and Metastatic disease. Against this background we have reviewed the activity in a district general hospital offering a spinal service to evaluate the efficacy of surgery in metastatic disease. Materials and Methods: Retrospective casenote review of patients identified through theatre records over a 3 year period. 27 patients were identified as having surgery for spinal tumours, of whom 24 were for metastatic disease. All presented with pain and/or signs of acute cord compression and had an intervention on an urgent or emergency basis by one of three spinal surgeons. Results: Of the 24 patients with metastases, the primary tumours were breast (7), lung(7), prostate(2), renal(2), bladder(1), clear cell (1), colon(1), thyroid(1) and unknown (2). The operations performed were: spinal decompression or vertebrectomy and stabilisation(18), stabilisation without decompression(4), decompression alone (1), biopsy only (1). Mean survival after surgery was 9.4 months (range 0–42 months) with a poorer outcome in those with pulmonary and renal disease. 7 patients remain alive with a mean follow up of 21 months. Symptomatic improvement was recorded in 19 / 24 patients in terms of pain control and/or restoration of function. There were 4 perioperative deaths of which none were due to complications of surgery.

Discussion: Patients with terminal diseases are challenging to treat as they require multidisciplinary input both in hospital and in the community. Good results can be achieved for both symptom control and pain relief by surgical intervention for spinal metastases if appropriate early referral is made to a spinal surgeon. We have found that with the general improvements in survival with malignancy an aggressive surgical regime of decompression or vertebrectomy with spinal stabilisation can be supported.