December 5, 2017Acta OrthopaedicaOpen Access

The risk of revision for SH and RH is similar when adjusted for age; lower age increases the risk of revision, and primary OA patients experience better shoulder functionality than secondary OA patients irrespective of implant type.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Why the study?

Does resurfacing shoulder hemiarthroplasty compared to stemmed hemiarthroplasty affect the risk of revision and patient-reported outcomes in patients with shoulder osteoarthritis?

Population

1,140 primary shoulder hemiarthroplasties for osteoarthritis reported to the Swedish Shoulder Arthroplasty…

Comparison

Resurfacing shoulder hemiarthroplasty (RH) vs Stemmed shoulder hemiarthroplasty (SH)

Design

Cohort

Follow-up

5 years

Authors

MÖMagnus Ödquist KHKristofer Hallberg HRHans Rahme

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

May favor stemmed over resurfacing hemiarthroplasty to minimize revisions; leaves open causal factors in this registry comparison.

Structured PICO

Does resurfacing shoulder hemiarthroplasty compared to stemmed hemiarthroplasty affect the risk of revision and patient-reported outcomes in patients with shoulder osteoarthritis?

Population

1,140 primary shoulder hemiarthroplasties for osteoarthritis (950 primary OA, 190 secondary OA) reported to the Swedish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry between 1999 and 2009, mean age 67.4 years.

Intervention

Resurfacing shoulder hemiarthroplasty (RH)

Comparator

Stemmed shoulder hemiarthroplasty (SH)

Outcome

Risk of revision and patient-reported outcome measures (WOOS and EQ-5D) at 5 yearshard clinical

In patients undergoing shoulder hemiarthroplasty for osteoarthritis, lower age is the primary driver of increased revision risk, explaining the apparent difference in revision rates between resurfacing and stemmed implants.

Cite This Study

Ödquist et al. (2017) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a7246cd35aa2c282ce32bf5 https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2017.1411081

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

December 5, 2017Acta OrthopaedicaOpen Access

The risk of revision for SH and RH is similar when adjusted for age; lower age increases the risk of revision, and primary OA patients experience better shoulder functionality than secondary OA patients irrespective of implant type.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Why the study?

Does resurfacing shoulder hemiarthroplasty compared to stemmed hemiarthroplasty affect the risk of revision and patient-reported outcomes in patients with shoulder osteoarthritis?

Population

1,140 primary shoulder hemiarthroplasties for osteoarthritis reported to the Swedish Shoulder Arthroplasty…

Comparison

Resurfacing shoulder hemiarthroplasty (RH) vs Stemmed shoulder hemiarthroplasty (SH)

Design

Cohort

Follow-up

5 years

Authors

MÖMagnus Ödquist KHKristofer Hallberg HRHans Rahme

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

May favor stemmed over resurfacing hemiarthroplasty to minimize revisions; leaves open causal factors in this registry comparison.

Structured PICO

Does resurfacing shoulder hemiarthroplasty compared to stemmed hemiarthroplasty affect the risk of revision and patient-reported outcomes in patients with shoulder osteoarthritis?

Population

1,140 primary shoulder hemiarthroplasties for osteoarthritis (950 primary OA, 190 secondary OA) reported to the Swedish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry between 1999 and 2009, mean age 67.4 years.

Intervention

Resurfacing shoulder hemiarthroplasty (RH)

Comparator

Stemmed shoulder hemiarthroplasty (SH)

Outcome

Risk of revision and patient-reported outcome measures (WOOS and EQ-5D) at 5 yearshard clinical

Cite This Study

Ödquist et al. (2017) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a7246cd35aa2c282ce32bf5 https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2017.1411081

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark