ArticleClinics in shoulder and elbow2023
Does physiotherapy after rotator cuff repair require supervision by a physical therapist?: a meta-analysis.
Article in Clinics in shoulder and elbow, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Orthopedic surgeon level joint angle assessment with artificial intelligence based on photography: a pilot study.Biomedical engineering letters · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA supervised physiotherapy program (SPP) is a standard regimen after surgical rotator cuff repair (RCR); however, the effect of a home-based exercise program (HEP), as an alternative, on postoperative functional recovery remains unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the functional effects of SPP and HEP after RCR.
methodsWe searched electronic databases including Central, Medline, and Embase in April 2022. The primary outcomes included the Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, University of California Los Angeles shoulder score, and pain score. Secondary outcomes included range of motion, muscle strength, retear rate, and patient satisfaction rate. A meta-analysis using random-effects models was performed on the pooled results to determine the significance.
resultsThe initial database search yielded 848 records, five of which met our criteria. Variables at 3 months after surgery were successfully analyzed, including the Constant score (mean difference, -8.51 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -32.72 to 15.69; P=0.49) and pain score (mean difference, 0.02 cm; 95% CI, -2.29 to 2.33; P=0.99). There were no significant differences between the SPP and HEP. Other variables were not analyzed owing to the lack of data.
conclusionsOur data showed no significant differences between SSP and HEP with regard to the Constant and pain scores at 3 months after RCR. These results suggest that HEP may be an alternative regimen after RCR. Level of evidence: I.
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.