Official Journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
Table 1 Details of included studies
From: Is acromioplasty necessary in the setting of full-thickness rotator cuff tears? A systematic review
Characteristics | Abrams et al. [29] | Gartsman and O’Connor [30] | MacDonald et al. [31] | Milano et al. [32] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Year | 2014 | 2004 | 2011 | 2007 |
Country | United States | United States | Canada | Italy |
Study design | RCT | RCT | RCT | RCT |
Level of evidence | II | II | I | I |
Procedures | ACR versus ACR-A | ACR versus ACR-SD | ACR versus ACR-A | ACR versus ACR-SD |
Inclusion criteria | Full-thickness superior rotator cuff tear | Isolated, repairable full-thickness supraspinatus tendon tear and type 2 acromion | Full-thickness rotator cuff tear | Full-thickness rotator cuff tear and type 2 or 3 acromion |
No. of patients | 95 | 93 | 86 | 80 |
Mean age in years | 58.8 (SD ±8.1) | 59.7 (range 37–81) | 56.8 (range 33–77) | 60.3 (SD ±8.3) |
Mean follow-up in months | 24 | 15.6 (SD ±3.3) | 24 | 24 |
Study outcome measures | ASES, SST, UCLA, VAS, Constant–Murley | ASES | ASES, ROM, WORC | Constant–Murley, DASH, Work-DASH |
Study characteristics comparable at baseline | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Use of validated questionnaires | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Presence of independent examiners | Yes | No | Not reported | Yes |
Difference in rehabilitation protocols in groups | No | No | Yes | No |