Ill-defined Return-to-Sport Criteria and Inconsistent Unsuccessful Return Rates Caused by Various Reasons Not Necessarily Related to Treatment After Superior Labral Treatments: A Systematic Review.

IF 4.4 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Igor J Shirinskiy, Cain Rutgers, Inger N Sierevelt, Simone Priester-Vink, David Ring, Michel Pj van den Bekerom, Lukas Pe Verweij
{"title":"Ill-defined Return-to-Sport Criteria and Inconsistent Unsuccessful Return Rates Caused by Various Reasons Not Necessarily Related to Treatment After Superior Labral Treatments: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Igor J Shirinskiy, Cain Rutgers, Inger N Sierevelt, Simone Priester-Vink, David Ring, Michel Pj van den Bekerom, Lukas Pe Verweij","doi":"10.1016/j.arthro.2024.09.053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine (1) which criteria are used to determine return to sport (RTS), (2) the number of patients who are unable to RTS after any superior labral pathophysiology treatment, and (3) which reasons are reported for not returning.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was performed across 5 databases, including studies that report rates for RTS after any treatment of superior labral pathophysiology. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. Definitions for no return to sport (nRTS) were extracted as reported in the studies. The ranges of nRTS and no return to preinjury level (nRTPL) were summarized. Reasons for nRTS and nRTPL were categorized using a predefined coding scheme.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 45 studies with level of evidence ranging from II to IV, 1,857 patients were involved in sports, 78% (n = 1453) of whom underwent superior labral reattachment, 21% (n = 381) biceps tenodesis, and 9.4% (n = 175) nonoperative treatment. None of the studies provided criteria for RTS, and 2 studies provided criteria for return to preinjury level. The ranges of nRTS and nRTPL varied after superior labral reattachment (0-60%, n = 206; 0-89%, n = 424, respectively), biceps tenodesis (0-25%, n = 43; 3, 8%-48%, n = 78), and nonoperative treatment (11%-75%, n = 62; 18%-100%, n = 78). Reasons for nRTS and nRTPL were related to physical sensations (pain, feeling of instability, discomfort, weakness, lack of motion), psychological factors (fear of reinjury, lack of confidence), personal factors (lifestyle change, social reasons), and injury at another site.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Criteria for determining successful RTS and return to preinjury level after superior labral pathophysiology treatment were not reported by most studies. The nRTS and nRTPL rates varied greatly within and between treatments. The reasons for this unsuccessful return were diverse and related to physical sensations, psychological factors, personal factors, and injury unrelated to treatment.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level IV, Systematic review of Level II-IV studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":55459,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2024.09.053","RegionNum":1,"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

Abstract

Purpose: To determine (1) which criteria are used to determine return to sport (RTS), (2) the number of patients who are unable to RTS after any superior labral pathophysiology treatment, and (3) which reasons are reported for not returning.

Methods: A systematic review was performed across 5 databases, including studies that report rates for RTS after any treatment of superior labral pathophysiology. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. Definitions for no return to sport (nRTS) were extracted as reported in the studies. The ranges of nRTS and no return to preinjury level (nRTPL) were summarized. Reasons for nRTS and nRTPL were categorized using a predefined coding scheme.

Results: Among 45 studies with level of evidence ranging from II to IV, 1,857 patients were involved in sports, 78% (n = 1453) of whom underwent superior labral reattachment, 21% (n = 381) biceps tenodesis, and 9.4% (n = 175) nonoperative treatment. None of the studies provided criteria for RTS, and 2 studies provided criteria for return to preinjury level. The ranges of nRTS and nRTPL varied after superior labral reattachment (0-60%, n = 206; 0-89%, n = 424, respectively), biceps tenodesis (0-25%, n = 43; 3, 8%-48%, n = 78), and nonoperative treatment (11%-75%, n = 62; 18%-100%, n = 78). Reasons for nRTS and nRTPL were related to physical sensations (pain, feeling of instability, discomfort, weakness, lack of motion), psychological factors (fear of reinjury, lack of confidence), personal factors (lifestyle change, social reasons), and injury at another site.

Conclusions: Criteria for determining successful RTS and return to preinjury level after superior labral pathophysiology treatment were not reported by most studies. The nRTS and nRTPL rates varied greatly within and between treatments. The reasons for this unsuccessful return were diverse and related to physical sensations, psychological factors, personal factors, and injury unrelated to treatment.

Level of evidence: Level IV, Systematic review of Level II-IV studies.

运动康复标准不明确,康复失败率不一致,原因多种多样,但不一定与上唇韧带治疗有关:系统回顾。
目的:本系统性综述的目的是确定(1)哪些标准用于确定重返运动场(RTS),(2)在接受任何上唇病理生理学治疗后无法重返运动场的患者人数,以及(3)报告未重返运动场的原因:方法:对 5 个数据库进行了系统性审查,其中包括报告任何上唇病理生理学治疗后 RTS 发生率的研究。研究质量采用 MINORS 标准进行评估。nRTS的定义根据研究报告进行提取。总结了无法恢复运动(nRTS)和无法恢复到受伤前水平(nRTPL)的范围。nRTS 和 nRTPL 的原因采用预定义的编码方案进行分类:在45项证据等级为II至IV级的研究中,有1857名患者参与了运动,其中78%(n=1453)的患者接受了上唇瓣再接合术,21%(n=381)的患者接受了二头肌腱鞘切除术,9.4%(n=175)的患者接受了非手术治疗。没有一项研究提供了 RTS 标准,两项研究提供了恢复到受伤前水平(RTPL)的标准。上唇再接合(分别为0-60%,n=206;0-89%,n=424)、二头肌腱鞘切除(0-25%,n=43;3.8-48%,n=78)和非手术治疗(11-75%,n=62;18-100%,n=78)后,nRTS和nRTPL的范围各不相同。进行 nRTS 和 nRTPL 的原因与身体感觉(疼痛、不稳定感、不适、虚弱、缺乏运动)、心理因素(害怕再次受伤、缺乏自信)、个人因素(生活方式改变、社会原因)和在其他部位受伤有关:结论:大多数研究都没有报告在上唇病理生理学治疗后成功进行 RTS 和 RTPL 的判定标准。不同治疗方法的 nRTS 和 nRTPL 率差异很大。不成功的原因多种多样,与身体感觉、心理因素、个人因素以及与治疗无关的损伤有关:证据等级:IV 级;系统综述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
17.00%
发文量
555
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: Nowhere is minimally invasive surgery explained better than in Arthroscopy, the leading peer-reviewed journal in the field. Every issue enables you to put into perspective the usefulness of the various emerging arthroscopic techniques. The advantages and disadvantages of these methods -- along with their applications in various situations -- are discussed in relation to their efficiency, efficacy and cost benefit. As a special incentive, paid subscribers also receive access to the journal expanded website.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信