初次与翻修全肘关节置换术的临床疗效和患者满意度比较。

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Pub Date : 2025-02-27 DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2025.01.036
Seung Min Ryu, Min Geol Je, Jeong Hee Park, Hui Ben, Kyoung Hwan Koh, In-Ho Jeon
{"title":"初次与翻修全肘关节置换术的临床疗效和患者满意度比较。","authors":"Seung Min Ryu, Min Geol Je, Jeong Hee Park, Hui Ben, Kyoung Hwan Koh, In-Ho Jeon","doi":"10.1016/j.jse.2025.01.036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Total elbow arthroplasty has become a common surgical procedure. However, a certain percentage of patients may require revision due to unsatisfactory outcomes or complications. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction between primary and revision total elbow arthroplasty, considering factors such as etiology and causes for revision.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study utilized a retrospective analysis of medical records from a cohort of 33 and 18 cases of primary and revision total elbow arthroplasty, respectively, with a minimum follow-up of 2 years from the primary procedure. Clinical outcomes were assessed by measuring the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score, range of motion, numeric rating scale, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation questionnaire, and patient satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant differences were observed between primary and revision groups in the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (79.5 vs. 65.0), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores (32.6 vs. 53.7), and elbow range of motion (107.6° vs. 85.8°). The patients' subjective assessment via the numeric rating scale score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, and satisfaction did not show significant differences. The average numeric rating scale score was 1.6 for both groups; however, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score (63 vs. 54) and patient satisfaction (4.0 vs. 4.1) were not significantly different between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The clinical outcomes of primary versus revision total elbow arthroplasty were significantly worse in the revision group. Patient satisfaction scores were not different between the primary and revision groups despite differences in outcome scores, suggesting that revision patients may be satisfied with their outcomes despite lower clinical scores. These findings underscore the importance of considering both patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction levels in addition to objective clinical measures when evaluating the success of primary versus revision total elbow arthroplasty procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":50051,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Clinical Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction in Primary vs. Revision Total Elbow Arthroplasty.\",\"authors\":\"Seung Min Ryu, Min Geol Je, Jeong Hee Park, Hui Ben, Kyoung Hwan Koh, In-Ho Jeon\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jse.2025.01.036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Total elbow arthroplasty has become a common surgical procedure. However, a certain percentage of patients may require revision due to unsatisfactory outcomes or complications. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction between primary and revision total elbow arthroplasty, considering factors such as etiology and causes for revision.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study utilized a retrospective analysis of medical records from a cohort of 33 and 18 cases of primary and revision total elbow arthroplasty, respectively, with a minimum follow-up of 2 years from the primary procedure. Clinical outcomes were assessed by measuring the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score, range of motion, numeric rating scale, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation questionnaire, and patient satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant differences were observed between primary and revision groups in the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (79.5 vs. 65.0), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores (32.6 vs. 53.7), and elbow range of motion (107.6° vs. 85.8°). The patients' subjective assessment via the numeric rating scale score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, and satisfaction did not show significant differences. The average numeric rating scale score was 1.6 for both groups; however, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score (63 vs. 54) and patient satisfaction (4.0 vs. 4.1) were not significantly different between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The clinical outcomes of primary versus revision total elbow arthroplasty were significantly worse in the revision group. Patient satisfaction scores were not different between the primary and revision groups despite differences in outcome scores, suggesting that revision patients may be satisfied with their outcomes despite lower clinical scores. These findings underscore the importance of considering both patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction levels in addition to objective clinical measures when evaluating the success of primary versus revision total elbow arthroplasty procedures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50051,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2025.01.036\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2025.01.036","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparative Clinical Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction in Primary vs. Revision Total Elbow Arthroplasty.

Background: Total elbow arthroplasty has become a common surgical procedure. However, a certain percentage of patients may require revision due to unsatisfactory outcomes or complications. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction between primary and revision total elbow arthroplasty, considering factors such as etiology and causes for revision.

Methods: The study utilized a retrospective analysis of medical records from a cohort of 33 and 18 cases of primary and revision total elbow arthroplasty, respectively, with a minimum follow-up of 2 years from the primary procedure. Clinical outcomes were assessed by measuring the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score, range of motion, numeric rating scale, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation questionnaire, and patient satisfaction.

Results: Significant differences were observed between primary and revision groups in the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (79.5 vs. 65.0), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores (32.6 vs. 53.7), and elbow range of motion (107.6° vs. 85.8°). The patients' subjective assessment via the numeric rating scale score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, and satisfaction did not show significant differences. The average numeric rating scale score was 1.6 for both groups; however, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score (63 vs. 54) and patient satisfaction (4.0 vs. 4.1) were not significantly different between groups.

Conclusion: The clinical outcomes of primary versus revision total elbow arthroplasty were significantly worse in the revision group. Patient satisfaction scores were not different between the primary and revision groups despite differences in outcome scores, suggesting that revision patients may be satisfied with their outcomes despite lower clinical scores. These findings underscore the importance of considering both patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction levels in addition to objective clinical measures when evaluating the success of primary versus revision total elbow arthroplasty procedures.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
23.30%
发文量
604
审稿时长
11.2 weeks
期刊介绍: The official publication for eight leading specialty organizations, this authoritative journal is the only publication to focus exclusively on medical, surgical, and physical techniques for treating injury/disease of the upper extremity, including the shoulder girdle, arm, and elbow. Clinically oriented and peer-reviewed, the Journal provides an international forum for the exchange of information on new techniques, instruments, and materials. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery features vivid photos, professional illustrations, and explicit diagrams that demonstrate surgical approaches and depict implant devices. Topics covered include fractures, dislocations, diseases and injuries of the rotator cuff, imaging techniques, arthritis, arthroscopy, arthroplasty, and rehabilitation.
期刊最新文献
Re-evaluating Surgical Treatment Protocol for Unstable Proximal Humerus Fractures: Emphasizing Soft Tissue Preservation via Minimally Invasive Approach over Structural Allograft Augmentation in Deltopectoral Approach: a Single-center Retrospective Study. 18F-FDG PET/CT for the diagnosis of septic shoulder arthritis: metabolic uptake pattern and diagnostic performance. Assessment of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty. Glenoid Version and Inclination Can be Accurately Predicted for Shoulder Arthroplasty from Preoperative Computed Tomography Scans Utilizing Virtual Implant PositioningTM Despite Missing Angulus Inferior Data Using Statistical Shape Modeling. Mapping the Microbial Landscape and Variations Based on Biological Sex, Age and Biopsy Location in the Shoulder Skin Microbiome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1