This study was performed to review the safety and outcome of total shoulder replacements in patients who are ≥ 80 years of age. A total of 50 total shoulder replacements in 44 patients at a mean age of 82 years (80 to 89) were studied. Their health and shoulder status, the operation and post-operative course were analysed, including pain, movement, patient satisfaction, medical and surgical complications, radiographs, the need for revision surgery, and implant and patient survival. A total of 27 patients had an ASA classification of III or IV and medical abnormalities were common. Of the 13 shoulders with bony deficiency of the glenoid, nine required grafting. The duration of hospital stay was prolonged and blood transfusions were common. There were no peri-operative deaths. The mean follow-up was for 5.5 years (2 to 12). Pain was significantly reduced (p < 0.001) and movement improved in active elevation and both external and internal rotation (p < 0.001). Using the Neer scale for assessing outcome, 40 (80%) shoulders had an excellent or satisfactory result. There were medical or surgical complications in 17 cases. Four shoulders developed radiological evidence of loosened glenoid components, and three of these had a poor outcome. Three other shoulders required revision, two for instability. By the time of this review 39 of the patients had died from unrelated causes at a mean of 7.5 years (0.8 to 16.4) after surgery. Total shoulder replacement is a relatively effective treatment in this elderly group of patients. However, there is a requirement for more intense patient care in the peri-operative period, and non-fatal medical or surgical complications are common. Most of these elderly patients will have a comfortable functional shoulder for the rest of their lives

We present a review of claims made to the NHS Litigation Authority (NHSLA) by patients with conditions affecting the shoulder and elbow, and identify areas of dissatisfaction and potential improvement. Between 1995 and 2012, the NHSLA recorded 811 claims related to the shoulder and elbow, 581 of which were settled. This comprised 364 shoulder (64%), and 217 elbow (36%) claims. A total of £18.2 million was paid out in settled claims. Overall diagnosis, mismanagement and intra-operative nerve injury were the most common reasons for litigation. The highest cost paid out resulted from claims dealing with incorrect, missed or delayed diagnosis, with just under £6 million paid out overall. Fractures and dislocations around the shoulder and elbow were common injuries in this category. All 11 claims following wrong-site surgery that were settled led to successful payouts.

This study highlights the diagnoses and procedures that need to be treated with particular vigilance. Having an awareness of the areas that lead to litigation in shoulder and elbow surgery will help to reduce inadvertent risks to patients and prevent dissatisfaction and possible litigation.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:574–9.

Locognosia, the ability to localise touch, is one aspect of tactile spatial discrimination which relies on the integrity of peripheral end-organs as well as the somatosensory representation of the surface of the body in the brain. The test presented here is a standardised assessment which uses a protocol for testing locognosia in the zones of the hand supplied by the median and/or ulnar nerves.

The test-retest reliability and discriminant validity were investigated in 39 patients with injuries to the median or ulnar nerve. Intraclass correlation coefficients were used to calculate the test-retest reliability. Discriminant validity was assessed by comparing the injured with the unaffected hand.

Excellent test-retest reliability was demonstrated for the injuries to the median (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.924, 95% confidence interval 0.848 to 1.00) and the ulnar nerves (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.859, 95% confidence interval 0.693 to 1.00). The magnitude of the difference in scores between affected and unaffected hands showed good discriminant validity. For injuries to the median nerve the mean difference was 11.1 points (1 to 33; sd 7.4), which was statistically significant (p < 0.0001, paired t-test) and for those of the ulnar nerve it was 4.75 points (1 to 13.5; sd 3.16), which was also statistically significant (paired t-test, p < 0.0001).

The locognosia test has excellent test-retest reliability, is a valid test of tactile spatial discrimination and should be included in the evaluation of outcome after injury to peripheral nerves.