Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 3 | Pages 360 - 364
1 Mar 2020
Jenkins PJ Stirling PHC Ireland J Elias-Jones C Brooksbank AJ

Aims. The aim of this study was to examine the recent trend in delivery of arthroscopic subacromial decompression (ASD) in Scotland and to determine if this varies by geographical location. Methods. Scottish Morbidity Records were reviewed retrospectively between March 2014 and April 2018 to identify records for every admission to each NHS hospital. The Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (OPCS-4) surgical codes were used to identify patients undergoing primary ASD. Patients who underwent acromioclavicular joint excision (ACJE) and rotator cuff repair (RCR) were identified and grouped separately. Procedure rates were age and sex standardized against the European standard population. Results. During the study period the number of ASDs fell by 649 cases (29%) from 2,217 in the first year to 1,568 in the final year. The standardized annual procedure rate fell from 41.6 (95% confidence interval (CI) 39.9 to 43.4) to 28.9 (95% CI 27.4 to 30.3) per 100,000. The greatest reduction occurred between 2017 and 2018. The number of ACJEs rose from 41 to 188 (a 3.59-fold increase). The number of RCRs fell from 655 to 560 (-15%). In the year 2017 to 2018 there were four (28.6%) Scottish NHS board areas where the ASD rate was greater than 3 standard deviations (SDs) from the national average, and two (14.3%) NHS boards where the rate was less than 3 SDs from the national average. Conclusion. There has been a clear decline in the rate of ASD in Scotland since 2014. Over the same period there has been an increase in the rate of ACJE. The greatest decline occurred between 2017 and 2018, corresponding to the publication of epidemiological studies demonstrating a rise in ASD, and awareness of studies which questioned the benefit of ASD. This paper demonstrates the potential impact of information from epidemiological studies, referral guidelines, and well-designed large multicentre randomized controlled trials on clinical practice. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(3):360–364


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 97-B, Issue 7 | Pages 963 - 966
1 Jul 2015
Evans JP Guyver PM Smith CD

Frozen shoulder is a recognised complication following simple arthroscopic shoulder procedures, but its exact incidence has not been reported. Our aim was to analyse a single-surgeon series of patients undergoing arthroscopic subacromial decompression (ASD; group 1) or ASD in combination with arthroscopic acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) excision (group 2), to establish the incidence of frozen shoulder post-operatively. Our secondary aim was to identify associated risk factors and to compare this cohort with a group of patients with primary frozen shoulder.

We undertook a retrospective analysis of 200 consecutive procedures performed between August 2011 and November 2013. Group 1 included 96 procedures and group 2 104 procedures. Frozen shoulder was diagnosed post-operatively using the British Elbow and Shoulder Society criteria. A comparative group from the same institution involved 136 patients undergoing arthroscopic capsular release for primary idiopathic frozen shoulder.

The incidence of frozen shoulder was 5.21% in group 1 and 5.71% in group 2. Age between 46 and 60 years (p = 0.002) and a previous idiopathic contralateral frozen shoulder (p < 0.001) were statistically significant risk factors for the development of secondary frozen shoulder. Comparison of baseline characteristics against the comparator groups showed no statistically significant differences for age, gender, diabetes and previous contralateral frozen shoulder.

These results suggest that the risk of frozen shoulder following simple arthroscopic procedures is just over 5%, with no increased risk if the ACJ is also excised. Patients aged between 46 and 60 years and a previous history of frozen shoulder increase the relative risk of secondary frozen shoulder by 7.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.1 to 28.3)and 18.5 (95% CI 7.4 to 46.3) respectively.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:963–6.