Moosmayer S, Lund G, Seljom U, Svege I, Hennig T, Tariq R, Smith H-J
Martina Hansen's Hospital, Baerum, Norway.
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010 Jan;92(1):83-91. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.92B1.22609.
In order to compare the outcome from surgical repair and physiotherapy, 103 patients with symptomatic small and medium-sized tears of the rotator cuff were randomly allocated to one of the two approaches. The primary outcome measure was the Constant score, and secondary outcome measures included the self-report section of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, the Short Form 36 Health Survey and subscores for shoulder movement, pain, strength and patient satisfaction. Scores were taken at baseline and after six and 12 months by a blinded assessor. Nine patients (18%) with insufficient benefit from physiotherapy after at least 15 treatment sessions underwent secondary surgical treatment. Analysis of between-group differences showed better results for the surgery group on the Constant scale (difference 13.0 points, p - 0.002), on the American Shoulder and Elbow surgeons scale (difference 16.1 points, p < 0.0005), for pain-free abduction (difference 28.8 degrees , p = 0.003) and for reduction in pain (difference on a visual analogue scale -1.7 cm, p < 0.0005).
为了比较手术修复和物理治疗的效果,103例有症状的中小型肩袖撕裂患者被随机分配至两种治疗方法之一。主要结局指标为康斯坦特评分,次要结局指标包括美国肩肘外科医师协会评分的自我报告部分、简明健康调查问卷36项以及肩部活动、疼痛、力量和患者满意度的子评分。评分由一名盲法评估者在基线时以及6个月和12个月后进行记录。至少接受15次治疗后物理治疗效果不佳的9例患者(18%)接受了二次手术治疗。组间差异分析显示,手术组在康斯坦特量表上的结果更好(差异13.0分,p = 0.002),在美国肩肘外科医师协会量表上(差异16.1分,p < 0.0005),无痛外展方面(差异28.8度,p = 0.003)以及疼痛减轻方面(视觉模拟量表差异-1.7 cm,p < 0.0005)。