ArticleWork (Reading, Mass.)2025
Factors influencing return to work after rotator cuff surgery: A scoping review.
Article in Work (Reading, Mass.), 2025. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundSurgical management of rotator cuff syndrome (RCS) is increasingly common in the world. After surgery, the return to work (RTW) process is often difficult for many patients, indicating the presence of factors that facilitate or delay this process.ObjectiveTo identify factors influencing RTW after rotator cuff (RC) surgery.MethodsArticles regarding RTW after RC surgery were systematically searched via PubMed, Embase, and ScienceDirect databases. The review was performed according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for scoping reviews.ResultsOf the 323 initial studies, 21 were included in the final analysis. These data represented 5445 patients, the RTW rate was 80.72%, and the time to return was 6.23 ± 1.41 months. Several individual factors are associated with poorer RTW: female sex, dominant limb injuries, surgical complications, and mental health disorders. The workload was the occupational factor with the greatest influence on the RTW process. Heavy manual work and traumatic or load-handling injury had a negative influence, whereas sedentary work, repetitive motion injury and less strenuous work had positive influences. Patients under the workers' compensation system were significantly associated with difficulty returning to work, but their return rates were not different.ConclusionsThere is no single factor that indicates the success of the RTW process within the evidence analyzed. On the contrary, several patient-related and work-related factors can positively or negatively influence this process. These findings are essential for understanding differences in RTW times among workers and for designing better return strategies.
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.