Observational studyChiropractic & manual therapies2020
Feasibility study: one year fortnightly follow-up of the evolution of supra-spinatus degeneration via text-messages.
Observational study in Chiropractic & manual therapies, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adherence to clinical guidelines in treating degenerative disorders of the supraspinatus tendon: A descriptive baseline analysis of surgical vs. conservative approaches in a 12-month observational study.Shoulder & elbow · 2026Article
- Correction to: Feasibility study: one year fortnightly follow-up of the evolution of supra-spinatus degeneration via text-messages.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe clinical follow-up of patients for degeneration of the supraspinatus tendon is limited by the lack of objective assessment of pain evolution over time. We therefore tested a new method to collect follow-up data on patients treated either by surgical cuff repair or rehabilitation.
objectivesWe report the feasibility this method in terms of recruitment of clinicians and patients and their compliance.
methodsIn this multicenter longitudinal observational study, between September 2015 and March 2019, patients consulting either for surgical repair or rehabilitation were examined at baseline and after twelve months by their clinician, including the Mini-DASH questionnaire. Fortnightlys, during one year, patients were asked about number of days their shoulder problem affected their daily life, number of nights woken up from shoulder pain, and present pain score, using text-messages for sending and responding to questions. A system administrator supervised responses and non-compliant subjects were contacted and assisted with the procedure. The CONSORT statement for pilot studies was followed.
resultsFour of 11 invited clinicians accepted participation and collected data till the end. Of the 410 patients we originally planned for, 252 were included in the study, but complete data for the clinicians' follow-up at 12 months were missing for 30. Of the 222 subjects with SMS data files, 190 (85%) provided at least 80% of their fortnightly messages. All three SMS messages were answered equally often. In total, 160 study subjects answered at least 80% of times and had clinical data at twelve months, i.e. 39% of the intended study sample and 72% of the 222 subjects with SMS data.
conclusionThe most important difficulty of this study was the enrolment and compliance of clinicians. The collection of SMS data was less successful than in previous studies, but French people accepted well this new method which is much easier and specific than collecting data through clinical records. The quality of the SMS data was acceptable. However, because of the limited number of complete datasets, only a limited number of questions from the original study protocol can be answered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.