Locke Auston R, Yendluri Avanish, Sabo Graham, Koehne Niklas H, Lee Alexander C, Legg-Jack Ibikari, Megafu Michael N, Li Xinning, Kelly John D, Parisien Robert L
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
JSES Rev Rep Tech. 2025 Mar 6;5(3):497-505. doi: 10.1016/j.xrrt.2025.01.012. eCollection 2025 Aug.
Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) is a technique commonly utilized to address degenerative pathologies of the glenohumeral joint. Utilization of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has led to increased reliance on the minimum clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds to assess efficacy of aTSA.
PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were queried for articles from January 1, 2000, March 31, 2023, reporting MCID, SCB, or PASS values for PROMs following aTSA. Patient demographics, study characteristics, MCID/SCB/PASS thresholds, and threshold calculation methods utilized were extracted.
Across the 30 studies comprising 11,482 patients who underwent aTSA, there were 13 unique PROMs reported. The most common were the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, the Simple Shoulder Test, the Constant-Murley Shoulder Outcome Score, the University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Score, the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index score, and the Visual Analog Scale. Of 30 studies, 25 (83%) reported MCID thresholds, 15 (50%) reported SCB, and 6 (20%) reported PASS. Of 30 studies, 20 (67%) studies reference a previous study when reporting MCID, SCB, or PASS values. Five (17%) used an anchor-based method to calculate threshold values, 1 (3%) used a distribution-based method, and 4 (13%) used both anchor and distribution methods. There were 46 newly calculated MCID (29) and SCB (17) threshold values. A variety of approaches were employed for threshold calculation, with anchor (difference in change) being the most common (52.9%). Notably, 83.3% of MCID thresholds had variability >50% of the most commonly referenced values and 33.3% of SCB calculated thresholds are >25% of the most commonly referenced values reported for the 6 most commonly utilized PROMs (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Simple Shoulder Test, Constant-Murley Shoulder Outcome Score, University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Score, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, and Visual Analog Scale).
The calculation methods and reported MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds in the aTSA literature demonstrate variability, especially for the most commonly utilized PROMs. Standardizing calculation and utilization of MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds for aTSA will ensure clinicians may more effectively assess patient outcomes.
解剖型全肩关节置换术(aTSA)是一种常用于治疗盂肱关节退行性病变的技术。患者报告结局测量指标(PROMs)的应用使得人们越来越依赖最小临床重要差异(MCID)、实质性临床获益(SCB)和患者可接受症状状态(PASS)阈值来评估aTSA的疗效。
检索了PubMed、Embase、MEDLINE、Cochrane图书馆和谷歌学术,查找2000年1月1日至2023年3月31日期间报道aTSA术后PROMs的MCID、SCB或PASS值的文章。提取了患者人口统计学信息、研究特征、MCID/SCB/PASS阈值以及所采用的阈值计算方法。
在纳入11482例行aTSA手术患者的30项研究中,共报告了13种不同的PROMs。最常见的是美国肩肘外科医师学会(ASES)评分、简易肩关节测试、Constant-Murley肩关节结局评分、加利福尼亚大学洛杉矶分校肩关节评分、肩痛与功能障碍指数评分以及视觉模拟量表。在30项研究中,25项(83%)报告了MCID阈值,15项(50%)报告了SCB,6项(20%)报告了PASS。在30项研究中,20项(67%)在报告MCID、SCB或PASS值时参考了先前的研究。5项(17%)使用基于锚定的方法计算阈值,1项(3%)使用基于分布的方法,4项(13%)同时使用了锚定和分布方法。有46个新计算的MCID(29个)和SCB(17个)阈值。阈值计算采用了多种方法,其中基于锚定(变化差异)的方法最为常见(52.9%)。值得注意的是,在6种最常用的PROMs(美国肩肘外科医师学会评分、简易肩关节测试、Constant-Murley肩关节结局评分、加利福尼亚大学洛杉矶分校肩关节评分、肩痛与功能障碍指数评分以及视觉模拟量表)中,83.3%的MCID阈值的变异性大于最常引用值的50%,33.3%的SCB计算阈值大于最常引用值的25%。
aTSA文献中的计算方法以及所报告的MCID、SCB和PASS阈值存在差异,尤其是对于最常用的PROMs。标准化aTSA的MCID、SCB和PASS阈值的计算和应用将确保临床医生能够更有效地评估患者的结局。