Shoulder arthroplasty is effective in the management of end-stage glenohumeral joint arthritis. However, it is major surgery and patients must balance multiple factors when considering the procedure. An understanding of patients’ decision-making processes may facilitate greater support of those considering shoulder arthroplasty and inform the outcomes of future research. Participants were recruited from waiting lists of three consultant upper limb surgeons across two NHS hospitals. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 participants who were awaiting elective shoulder arthroplasty. Transcribed interviews were analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Systematic coding was performed; initial codes were categorized and further developed into summary narratives through a process of discussion and refinement. Data collection and analyses continued until thematic saturation was reached.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to characterize the influence of social deprivation on the rate of complications, readmissions, and revisions following primary total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), using the Social Deprivation Index (SDI). The SDI is a composite measurement, in percentages, of seven demographic characteristics: living in poverty, with < 12 years of education, single-parent households, living in rented or overcrowded housing, households without a car, and unemployed adults aged < 65 years. Patients aged ≥ 40 years, who underwent primary TSA between 2011 and 2017, were identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 Clinical Modification and ICD-10 procedure codes for TSA in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database. Readmission, reoperation, and other complications were analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression controlling for SDI, age, ethnicity, insurance status, and Charlson Comorbidity Index.Aims
Methods
To compare complication-related reoperation rates following primary arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) We identified patients aged 50 years and over, who sustained a PHF between 2004 and 2015, from linkable datasets. We used intervention codes to identify patients treated with initial ORIF or arthroplasty, and those treated with ORIF who returned for revision arthroplasty within two years. We used multilevel logistic regression to compare reoperations between groups.Aims
Patients and Methods
The aim of this study was to use national registry database information to estimate cumulative rates and relative risk of revision due to infection after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. We included 17 730 primary shoulder arthroplasties recorded between 2004 and 2013 in The Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) data set. With the Kaplan–Meier method, we illustrated the ten-year cumulative rates of revision due to infection and with the Cox regression model, we reported the hazard ratios as a measure of the relative risk of revision due to infection.Aims
Patients and Methods
In this study, we evaluated patient-reported
outcomes, the rate of revision and the indications for revision
following resurfacing hemiarthroplasty of the shoulder in patients
with osteoarthritis. All patients with osteoarthritis who underwent primary resurfacing
hemiarthroplasty and reported to the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty
Registry (DSR), between January 2006 and December 2010 were included.
There were 772 patients (837 arthroplasties) in the study. The Western
Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index was used to
evaluate patient-reported outcome 12 months (10 to 14) post-operatively.
The rates of revision were calculated from the revisions reported
to the DSR up to December 2011 and by checking deaths with the Danish National
Register of Persons. A complete questionnaire was returned by 688 patients (82.2%).
The mean WOOS was 67 (0 to 100). A total of 63 hemiarthroplasties
(7.5%) required revision; the cumulative five-year rate of revision
was 9.9%. Patients aged <
55 years had a statistically significant
inferior WOOS score, which exceeded the minimal clinically important
difference, compared with older patients (mean difference 14.2 (8.8;
95% CI 19.6; p <
0.001), but with no increased risk of revision.
There was no significant difference in the mean WOOS or the risk
of revision between designs of resurfacing hemiarthroplasty. Cite this article:
