We report a randomised controlled trial to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic acromioplasty in the treatment of stage II shoulder impingement syndrome. A total of 140 patients were randomly divided into two treatment groups: supervised exercise programme (n = 70, exercise group) and arthroscopic acromioplasty followed by a similar exercise programme (n = 70, combined treatment group). The main outcome measure was self-reported pain on a visual analogue scale of 0 to 10 at 24 months, measured on the 134 patients (66 in the exercise group and 68 in the combined treatment group) for whom endpoint data were available. An intention-to-treat analysis disclosed an improvement in both groups but without statistically significant difference in outcome between the groups (p = 0.65). The combined treatment was considerably more costly. Arthroscopic acromioplasty provides no clinically important effects over a structured and supervised exercise programme alone in terms of subjective outcome or cost-effectiveness when measured at 24 months. Structured exercise treatment should be the basis for treatment of shoulder impingement syndrome, with operative treatment offered judiciously until its true merit is proven.
The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) as compared with non-operative measures. Four university hospitals contributed, after agreement on study protocol, surgical rationale and non-operative procedures (For details, see We conclude that surgical treatment improves functional ability in lumbar spinal stenosis. We emphasize that improvement also occurs after nonoperative measures. We recommend starting treatment with non-operative measures during a 2-year surveillance period, as during this period only 10 per cent of the patients will need surgical intervention.
Since neurological claudication is a major symptom in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), walking distance is commonly used as a measure of the severity and surgical outcome in LSS. The aim of this study was to compare self-reported and treadmill-measured walking distances in a trial, in which 94 patients with moderate LSS had been randomized into conservative and surgical treatment. Among the 44 patients in conservative treatment, the treadmill-measured walking distance was more reproducible after 6 months than the self-reported distance; the intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.75 and 0.41, respectively. Among all the patients at baseline, the agreement between self-reported and measured walking distance was satisfactory (intraclass correlation 0.57), although male patients overwhelmed their performance by 200 meters. Such a shift was not found in women. For walking distance categorized as <
400, 400–1249 and ≥ 1250 meters, there was a fair agreement between self-report and treadmill (weighed kappa 0.42). However, when the analysis was restricted to those whose walking distance was restricted to <
1250 meters, the corresponding agreement was poor (intraclass correlation 0.26). The self-reported walking distance was closely correlated with Oswestry index at baseline (r = 0.26), and changes in these outcomes from randomization to the follow-up of 6 months showed a strong correlation with each other (r = 0.37). We conclude that walking distance is a fundamental element of disability in LSS. Self-reported walking distance seems to be an appropriate clinical tool, but its limited precision in relation to treadmill-measured distance must be considered, when walking ability is severely restricted.