ArticleJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2025
Utilization of patient-reported outcome measures in shoulder and elbow surgery: a survey-based study.
Article in JSES reviews, reports, and techniques, 2025. 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.
- Remote usage of digital patient-reported outcome measures for shoulder and elbow pathologies: a systematic review.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely established in shoulder and elbow surgery, as they are able to reflect the functional outcome after a respective treatment. However, various challenges exist to add PROMs into in the daily clinical practice. The aim of the presented study was to analyze the utilization of PROMs among shoulder and elbow physicians in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Methods: An online questionnaire (SurveyMonkey) assessed the use of shoulder- and elbow-specific PROMs in orthopedic and trauma surgery clinics across the D-A-CH region. Distributed via the D-A-CH Society for Shoulder and Elbow Surgery email list, surveys were enlisted from April to December 2024. Participation was voluntary, anonymous, and implied consent. Due to anonymity, European data protection regulations were not applicable. Ethical approval was obtained. Results: Among 124 participants, 82% were male and 17% female. While 54% did not use PROMs, 46% incorporated them into daily practice. For shoulders, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (DASH)/quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (73%), Simple Shoulder Test (29%), and ROWE Score (21%) were most frequently used. Regarding elbows, 54% did not use PROMs, DASH (29%) and Mayo Elbow Performance Score (25%) were most common among users. PROMs were primarily collected via paper questionnaires (58%) or not with digital tools (23%). PROMs were valued for scientific research (73%), therapy monitoring (71%), and treatment quality improvement (56%). Key disadvantages included subjective patient perception (71%), needed patient collaboration (67%), and additional workload (63%). Conclusion: PROMs are still rarely used in daily clinical practice but are valued for enhancing research and treatment quality by integrating patients' subjective experiences. Key barriers include the lack of affordable, user-friendly digital solutions. Future efforts may focus on professional society recommendations for suitable PROMs and the establishment of their digital measuring.
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.