METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all RSAs performed in 7 centers from 1998 to 2010. The inclusion criteria were primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis with B1, B2, B3, or C glenoid. Forty-nine shoulders in 45 patients fulfilled the criteria. Bone grafting was performed in 16 cases. Clinical outcomes were evaluated with the Constant score (CS) and shoulder range of motion.
RESULTS: The mean total CS increased from 30 preoperatively to 68 points (P < .001) with significant improvements in all the subsections of the CS and range of motion. Scapular notching was observed in 20 shoulders (43%), grade 1 in 5 (11%), grade 2 in 7 (15%), grade 3 in 5 (11%), and grade 4 in 3 (6%). The glenoid bone graft healed in all the shoulders. Partial inferior lysis of the bone graft was present in 8 cases (50%). Scapular notching and glenoid bone graft resorption had no influence on the CS (P = .147 and P = .798).
CONCLUSION: RSA for the treatment of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis in patients with posterior glenoid deficiency and humeral subluxation without rotator cuff insufficiency resulted in excellent clinical outcomes at a minimum of 5 years of follow-up.
OBJECTIVE: This study looked into whether crossbar can reliably measure Upper Instrumend Vertebra (UIV) tilt angle intraoperatively and accurately predict the UIV tilt angle postoperatively and at final follow-up.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Postoperative shoulder imbalance is a common cause of poor cosmetic appearance leading to patient dissatisfaction. There were no reports describing the technique or method in measuring the UIV tilt angle intraoperatively. Therefore, this study was designed to look into the reliability and accuracy of the usage of intraoperative crossbar in measuring the UIV tilt angle intraoperatively.
METHODS: Lenke 1 and 2 Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis patients who underwent instrumented Posterior Spinal Fusion using pedicle screw constructs with minimum follow-up of 24 months were recruited for this study. After surgical correction, intraoperative UIV tilt angle was measured using a crossbar. Immediate postoperative and final follow up UIV tilt angle was measured on the standing anteroposterior radiographs.
RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were included into this study. The reliability of the intraoperative crossbar to measure the optimal UIV tilt angle intraoperatively was determined by repeated measurements by assessors and measurement by different assessors. We found that the intra observer and inter observer reliability was very good with intraclass correlation coefficient values of >0.9. The accuracy of the intraoperative crossbar to measure the optimal UIV tilt angle intraoperatively was determined by comparing this measurement with the postoperative UIV tilt angle. We found that there was no significant difference (P>0.05) between intraoperative, immediate postoperative, and follow-up UIV tilt angle.
CONCLUSIONS: The crossbar can be used to measure the intraoperative UIV tilt angle consistently and was able to predict the postoperative UIV tilt angle. It was a cheap, simple, reliable, and accurate instrument to measure the intraoperative UIV tilt angle.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between a +ve postoperative Upper Instrumented Vertebra (UIV) (≥0°) tilt angle and the risk of medial shoulder/neck and lateral shoulder imbalance among Lenke 1 and 2 Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS) patients following Posterior Spinal Fusion.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Current UIV selection strategy has poor correlation with postoperative shoulder balance. The relationship between a +ve postoperative UIV tilt angle and the risk of postoperative shoulder and neck imbalance was unknown.
METHODS: One hundred thirty-six Lenke 1 and 2 AIS patients with minimum 2 years follow-up were recruited. For medial shoulder and neck balance, patients were categorized into positive (+ve) imbalance (≥+4°), balanced, or negative (-ve) imbalance (≤-4°) groups based on T1 tilt angle/Cervical Axis measurement. For lateral shoulder balance, patients were classified into +ve imbalance (≥+3°) balanced, and -ve imbalance (≤-3°) groups based on Clavicle Angle (Cla-A) measurement. Linear regression analysis identified the predictive factors for shoulder/neck imbalance. Logistic regression analysis calculated the odds ratio of shoulder/neck imbalance for patients with +ve postoperative UIV tilt angle.
RESULTS: Postoperative UIV tilt angle and preoperative T1 tilt angle were predictive of +ve medial shoulder imbalance. Postoperative UIV tilt angle and postoperative PT correction were predictive of +ve neck imbalance. Approximately 51.6% of patients with +ve medial shoulder imbalance had +ve postoperative UIV tilt angle. Patients with +ve postoperative UIV tilt angle had 14.9 times increased odds of developing +ve medial shoulder imbalance and 3.3 times increased odds of developing +ve neck imbalance. Postoperative UIV tilt angle did not predict lateral shoulder imbalance.
CONCLUSION: Patients with +ve postoperative UIV tilt angle had 14.9 times increased odds of developing +ve medial shoulder imbalance (T1 tilt angle ≥+4°) and 3.3 times increased odds of developing +ve neck imbalance (cervical axis ≥+4°).
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.
METHODS: The mean follow-up for 60 AIS (Lenke 1 and Lenke 2) patients was 49.3 ± 8.4 months. Optimal UIV tilt angle was calculated from the cervical supine side bending radiographs. Lateral shoulder imbalance was graded using the clinical shoulder grading. The clinical neck tilt grading was as follows: Grade 0: no neck tilt, Grade 1: actively correctable neck tilt, Grade 2: neck tilt that cannot be corrected by active contraction and Grade 3: severe neck tilt with trapezial asymmetry >1 cm. T1 tilt, clavicle angle and cervical axis were measured. UIVDiff (difference between post-operative UIV tilt and pre-operative Optimal UIV tilt) and the reserve motion of the UIV were correlated with the outcome measures. Patients were assessed at 6 weeks and at final follow-up with a minimum follow-up duration of 24 months.
RESULTS: Among patients with grade 0 neck tilt, 88.2 % of patients had the UIV tilt angle within the reserve motion range. This percentage dropped to 75.0 % in patients with grade 1 neck tilt whereas in patients with grade 2 and grade 3 neck tilt, the percentage dropped further to 22.2 and 20.0 % (p = 0.000). The occurrence of grade 2 and 3 neck tilt when UIVDiff was <5°, 5-10° and >10° was 9.5, 50.0 and 100.0 %, respectively (p = 0.005). UIVDiff and T1 tilt had a positive and strong correlation (r2 = 0.618). However, UIVDiff had poor correlation with clavicle angle and the lateral shoulder imbalance.
CONCLUSION: An optimal UIV tilt might prevent neck tilt with 'medial' shoulder imbalance due to trapezial prominence and but not 'lateral' shoulder imbalance.
METHODS: 89 AIS Lenke 1 and 2 cases were assessed prospectively using the new clinical neck tilt grading. Shoulder imbalance and neck tilt were correlated with coracoid height difference (CHD), clavicle\rib intersection distance (CRID), clavicle angle (CA), radiographic shoulder height (RSH), T1 tilt and cervical axis.
RESULTS: Mean age was 17.2 ± 3.8 years old. 66.3 % were Lenke type 1 and 33.7 % were type 2 curves. Strong intraobserver (0.79) and interobserver (0.75) agreement of the clinical neck tilt grading was noted. No significant correlation was observed between clinical neck tilt and shoulder imbalance (0.936). 56.3 % of grade 3 neck tilt, 50.0 % grade 2 neck tilt patients had grade 0 shoulder imbalance. In patients with grade 2 shoulder imbalance, 42.9 % had grade 0, 35.7 % grade 1, 14.3 % grade 2 and only 7.1 % had grade 3 neck tilt. CHD, CRID, CA and RSH correlated with shoulder imbalance. T1 tilt and cervical axis measurements correlated with neck tilt.
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, neck tilt is distinct from shoulder imbalance. Clinical neck tilt has poor correlation with clinical shoulder imbalance. Clinical neck tilt grading correlated with cervical axis and T1 tilt whereas clinical shoulder grading correlated with CHD, RSH CRID and CA.
Methods: Overall, 142 participants (height: 1.80 ± 0.15 m, BMI: 26.08± 6.70, age: 35±15 yr) with at least a year of working experience completed both questionnaires, the online ROSA and the Cornell musculoskeletal discomfort, in 2016 in Malaysia.
Results: Relationship between the total scores of both questionnaires for lower back, shoulder and neck pain were significant but exhibited a weak to moderate relationship (range of r values from 0.012 (CI 95%, -0.153-0.176) to 0.503 (CI 95%, 0.369-0.616).
Conclusion: The online ROSA does not appear to be a reasonable tool for evaluating the severity of lower back, shoulder and neck pain among office workers as the correlations were low. We suggest continued use of the musculoskeletal discomfort questionnaire. Additional studies are required to further examine the ROSA for other anatomical regions.
METHOD: This study utilized a quantitative, nonexperimental, cross-sectional research design. A total of 60 subjects were randomly selected after passing the study's sampling criteria. The Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ) was to used to determine common MSDs affecting the various regions in the body. The Demographic Pofile Sheet was provided to gather a subject's demographic characteristics.
RESULTS: Filipino migrant workers mostly complain of pain in the low back area (60%) and shoulder pain (60%), followed by pain in the upper back (48.3%) and neck pain (45%) in the last 12 months. Household workers accounting for 73.3% of the subjects commonly complain of pain in the hips/thighs (78.9%), while workers in the service industry commonly complain of knee pain (39.1%).
CONCLUSIONS: Results imply that Filipino migrant workers have a higher prevalence of shoulder and lower back pain in the last 12 months. Household workers are more susceptible to hip/thigh pain. Interventions focusing on ergonomics policy implementation, education on posture and lifting techniques and physical function is recommended. Further studies should consider the psychological and psychosocial aspects of migrant employment, which are known risk factors for MSDs.