ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2022
A Scoping Review of Postoperative Rehabilitation Protocols After Superior Capsular Reconstruction for Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) is an option for patients with massive or irreparable rotator cuff tears. Purpose: To describe the literature on rehabilitation protocols after SCR of rotator cuff tears, with emphasis on the timing of the introduction of motion. Study Design: Scoping review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: We conducted a scoping review of articles published on PubMed, Ovid, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to October 2020. The methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) was used to assess the individual studies. For each article, we summarized the study characteristics, patient demographics, and rehabilitation protocols after SCR: duration of immobilization, initiation of passive range of motion (ROM), active-assisted ROM, active ROM, strengthening, and return to activities. In a subgroup narrative analysis, rehabilitation protocols were stratified by graft type: autograft versus nonautograft (xenograft, allograft, and synthetic). Results: A total of 21 studies met the search criteria. Six studies had level 3 evidence and 15 had level 4 evidence; 16 studies were considered high quality according to the MINORS score. After SCR, an abduction immobilizer was recommended for a duration of 3 to 6 weeks. Of the 21 studies, 7 (33%) started passive ROM during the first week, and 5 reported strict immobilization without motion for up to 6 weeks. All 8 studies that reported return-to-sports timing recommended delaying return until at least 6 months postoperatively. Passive ROM was recommended earlier for patients with nonautograft versus autograft (χ Conclusion: The majority of published protocols were descriptive. At present, there is little agreement on the published rehabilitation guidelines after SCR, precluding specific clinical best practice suggestions. Although there was a tendency of recommending early motion in nonautograft cases, the optimal protocols based on graft healing and functional outcomes require further verification based on the clinical outcomes from high-quality studies.
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.