Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27757408›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2016

Functional Outcomes After Double-Row Versus Single-Row Rotator Cuff Repair: A Prospective Randomized Trial.

Stephen J Nicholas, Steven J Lee, Michael J Mullaney, Timothy F Tyler, Takumi Fukunaga, Christopher D Johnson, Malachy P McHugh

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. A Historical Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials in Rotator Cuff Tears.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephen J NicholasNicholas Institute of Sports Medicine and Athletic Trauma, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, New York, USA.
Steven J LeeNicholas Institute of Sports Medicine and Athletic Trauma, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, New York, USA.
Michael J MullaneyNicholas Institute of Sports Medicine and Athletic Trauma, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, New York, USA.
Timothy F TylerNicholas Institute of Sports Medicine and Athletic Trauma, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, New York, USA.
Takumi FukunagaNicholas Institute of Sports Medicine and Athletic Trauma, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, New York, USA.
Christopher D JohnsonNicholas Institute of Sports Medicine and Athletic Trauma, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, New York, USA.
Malachy P McHughNicholas Institute of Sports Medicine and Athletic Trauma, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, New York, USA.
Lenox Hill Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe functional benefits of double-row (DR) versus single-row (SR) rotator cuff repair are not clearly established. PURPOSE: To examine the effect of DR versus SR rotator cuff repair on functional outcomes and strength recovery in patients with full-thickness tears. STUDY

designRandomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.

methodsForty-nine patients were randomized to DR or SR repairs; 36 patients (13 women, 23 men; mean age, 62 ± 7 years; 20 SR, 16 DR) were assessed at a mean 2.2 ± 1.6 years after surgery (range, 1-7 years; tear size: 17 medium, 13 large, 9 massive). The following data were recorded prior to surgery and at follow-up: Penn shoulder score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) results; range of motion (ROM) for shoulder flexion, external rotation (ER) at 0° and 90° of abduction, and internal rotation (IR) at 90° of abduction; and shoulder strength (Lafayette manual muscle tester) in empty- and full-can tests, abduction, and ER at 0° of abduction. Treatment (SR vs DR) × time (pre- vs postoperative) mixed-model analysis of variance was used to assess the effect of rotator cuff repair.

resultsRotator cuff repair markedly improved Penn, ASES, and SST scores (

conclusionOutcomes were not different between SR or DR repair, with generally excellent outcomes for both groups. Rotator cuff repair and subsequent rehabilitation markedly improved shoulder strength.

Indexed as

empty-can testfull-thickness tearhandheld dynamometershoulder strength

Identifiers

PMID27757408
PMCPMC5051628
OpenAlexW1852338068

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.