Implant removal is necessary in up to 25% of patients with plate osteosynthesis after proximal humeral fracture. Our new technique of arthroscopic implant removal offers all advantages of minimal invasive surgery. Additionally treatment of concomitant intraarticular lesions is possible. This study outlines the first results after arthroscopic implant removal in comparison with those of open implant removal. A prospective series of 40 consecutive treated patients had implant removal and arthrolysis after plate osteosynthesis of proximal humeral fracture. Implant removal was carried out due to limitation in range of movement, secondary implant dislocation and implant impingement. 30 patients (median age 63 (30–82) years) had arthroscopic, ten patients (median age 53 (34–76) years) had open implant removal. Median 10 months after implant removal subjective patient satisfaction, Constant Murley Score (CMS) and Simple Shoulder Test were determined. Arthroscopic implant removal showed comparable first results as open implant removal. There was no significant difference between CMS of both groups. The active shoulder abduction, flexion and external rotation improved significantly after arthroscopic and open implant removal. The simple shoulder test outlined advantages for the arthroscopic technique. After arthroscopic implant removal patients showed higher subjective satisfaction as well as faster pain reduction and mobilization. Analysis of perioperative data showed less blood loss in the group with arthroscopic implant removal. In 85% of patients with arthroscopic implant removal concomitant intraarticular lesions were observed and treated. The arthroscopic implant removal after plate osteosynthesis of proximal humeral fractures offers all advantages of minimal invasive surgery and comparable first results as the open implant removal. The subjective and objective satisfaction of patients is high. The technique can be applied and established by all arthroscopic trained shoulder surgeons

Introduction. There are over 110 special tests described in the literature for clinical examination of the shoulder, but there is no general consensus as to which of these are the most appropriate to use. Individual opinion appears to dictate clinical practice. Rationalising which tests and clinical signs are the most useful would not only be helpful for trainees, but would also improve day to day practice and promote better communication and understanding between clinicians. Methodology. We sent a questionnaire survey to all shoulder surgeons in the UK (BESS members), asking which clinical tests each surgeon found most helpful in diagnosing specific shoulder pathologies; namely sub-acromial impingement, biceps tendonitis, rotator cuff tears and instability; both anterior and posterior. Results. For impingement; Hawkins-Kennedy and Neer's tests were used by the majority of respondents, with 50% also routinely performing Neer's injection test. For frozen shoulder; the shoulder quadrant test was the commonest used, followed by loss of passive range of motion and loss of external rotation. For biceps tendonitis; Speed's and Yergason's tests were by far the commonest used. For rotator cuff tears the commonest signs were; the Napoleon belly press, Hornblower's sign, Gerber's sign, Jobe's sign and Codman's drop arm sign. For instability; the apprehension test, the Gerber-Ganz drawer test, load and shift test and Jobe's relocation test were the commonest used, with the jerk test also popular for posterior instability. We are also currently assessing how individuals actually perform these tests, and whether they are as the original authors described them. Conclusion. Our results demonstrated some variation in which tests were being used, but with an increased preference for certain tests. Interestingly a large number of respondents commented that the history was of paramount importance and that clinical signs should only substantiate the clinician's diagnosis

Aims

The primary aim of this study was to establish the cost-effectiveness of the early fixation of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.

Objectives

Accurate characterisation of fractures is essential in fracture management trials. However, this is often hampered by poor inter-observer agreement. This article describes the practicalities of defining the fracture population, based on the Neer classification, within a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial in which surgical treatment was compared with non-surgical treatment in adults with displaced fractures of the proximal humerus involving the surgical neck.