Rotator Cuff Tear ArthropathyNCT04285606
Effect of Postop Rehab Methods on Outcomes Following Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty
A study testing Patient-led rehab with short immobilization in people with Rotator Cuff Tear Arthropathy and Shoulder Osteoarthritis, run by University of Missouri-Columbia at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Notwithstanding the rapid increase in utilization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), little consensus or high-quality evidence exists regarding optimal rehab methods following the procedure. Our research question is how different rehab methods influence the clinical outcomes following RTSA. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Rotator Cuff Tear Arthropathy, Shoulder Osteoarthritis
- What is being tested?
- Patient-led rehab with short immobilization
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 0 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 8 Jul 2020to 16 Nov 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Aged 18 years or older
- Diagnosed with rotator cuff arthropathy, glenohumeral osteoarthritis with a > 1.5-cm rotator cuff tear, or massive irreparable rotator cuff tear
- Have a normal functioning deltoid
- Have preserved teres minor function (a negative Hornblower's sign)
- Have failed conservative management for >3 months
Who cannot join
- younger than 18 years
- chronic opiate use history
- fibromyalgia or other conditions that increase susceptibility to pain
- preoperative stiffness (definition: < 30 degree passive external rotation, < 90 degree passive forward elevation), neurologic disorder affecting the ipsilateral upper extremity,
- RTSA for acute proximal humerus fracture or fracture sequelae (nonunion, malunion)
- previous arthroplasty, fracture fixation, or open rotator cuff procedures in the same shoulder
Show all 9Show fewer
- deltoid dysfunction
- inflammatory glenohumeral arthritis
- non-English speaking or unable to understand English for consent.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Effect of Different Postoperative Rehab Methods on Clinical Outcomes Following Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Study
Notwithstanding the rapid increase in utilization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), little consensus or high-quality evidence exists regarding optimal rehab methods following the procedure. Our research question is how different rehab methods influence the clinical outcomes following RTSA. This proposal presents a prospective randomized clinical trial where 100 eligible RTSA patients will be randomly assigned to two rehab groups (Short immobilization with patient-directed therapy vs Long immobilization with supervised therapy) at a single institution. Patient-reported outcomes, objective clinical data, and complications will be compared between the groups over a period of 2 years.
Read the detailed description
The investigators will perform a prospective randomized non-blinded clinical study where the investigators will recruit a total of 100 patients undergoing RTSA at our institution according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two rehab groups (50 in each group) - short immobilization combined with patient-directed home therapy (Patient-led rehab) vs long immobilization combined with supervised physical therapy (Supervised rehab) - using a randomization protocol developed by our biostatistics department. The group assignment will be kept sealed in an envelope until the day of surgery to blind both the patients and surgeons.
Surgical procedure and postoperative rehabilitation Enrolled patients will undergo RTSA with one of the two shoulder and elbow surgeons under general anesthesia combined with interscalene block. A standard deltopectoral approach will be used, and the subscapularis tendon will be repaired using transosseous sutures if it is reparable. Tornier reverse shoulder arthroplasty system (Ascent Flex humeral stem with 132.5°inclincation angle, standard Perform Reversed glenoid components, and standard polyethylene liner) will be used in all patients. The size of the humeral stem, baseplate, glenosphere, and polyethylene liner will be chosen on the basis of the patient's anatomy. A sling with an abduction pillow will be used for postoperative immobilization in 30° abduction and 45° internal rotation in all patients. The patient-led rehab group will be educated on their postoperative rehab in detail prior to surgery. The detailed rehab methods for each group are as follows.
- Patient-led rehab group Duration of the sling: 1 week in sling with abduction pillow for immobilization; then optional for comfort only Start of shoulder exercise: Within 1 week of surgery once pain subsides Mode of rehab: Patients performing exercises on their own following instructions Phase 1 (3-5 days to 2 weeks): Pendulum, deltoid and periscapular muscle isometric strengthening Phase 2 (2-4 weeks): passive, active assisted motion Phase 3 (4-8 weeks): Active motion Phase 4 (8-12 weeks): Strengthening
- Supervised rehab group Duration of the sling: 4 weeks in sling with abduction pillow for immobilization; then optional for comfort only Start of shoulder exercise: At 4 weeks after surgery Mode of rehab: Patients attending outpatient physical therapy sessions led by therapists Phase 1 (0-4 weeks): Immobilization in sling Phase 2 (4-8 weeks): Passive, active assisted motion Phase 3 (8-12 weeks): Active motin Phase 4 (12-16 weeks): Strengthening
Postoperative outcome evaluation Strict adherence to the rehab protocol will be encouraged and monitored during the rehab period. The research coordinator will contact patients twice a week for the first 2 weeks and then once a week for the following 2 weeks. Patients will be given a pain diary where they will record their pain levels daily along with their daily narcotic use for the first 2 weeks. Patients will return for follow-up, undergo x-rays, and will be evaluated at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years. The following data will be obtained during the study period.
- Pain measured using a visual analog scale daily for the first 2 weeks; then at each follow-up visit
- Patient-reported outcomes: ASES, QuickDASH, SANE, and PROMIS at each visit except at 2 weeks.
- Range of motion: forward elevation, external rotation, internal rotation at each visit except at 2 weeks
- Radiographic findings of failure such as dislocation, implant dislodgement, migration, or loosening, scapular notching, periprosthetic humuerus fracture, or scapular fracture at any time: Will be included as complications
- Complications such as instability, hematoma, wound healing issue, abnormal level of pain due to rehab method at any time, or reoperation
- Overall patient satisfaction with their rehab method using a 5-point Likert-type scale at 6 months (Question: Were you satisfied with your rehab method? Very unsatisfied, slightly unsatisfied, neutral, somewhat satisfied, very satisfied)
Statistical analysis Sample size calculation: Sample size was calculated to examine the superiority of patient-led rehab over supervised rehab. The null hypothesis is that there is no difference in the primary outcome measure (ASES score at 6 months) between the two rehab methods. Considering similar protocols in the literature12-14 and a mean difference in ASES scores of 11 points with corresponding standard deviation of 18 points, a minimum of 100 patients (50 for each group) are needed to achieve at least 80% power using a two-sided type I error of 0.05. These numbers account for a 10% patient attrition.
Statistical methods: Intention-to-treat analysis will be used for this randomized clinical trial study. Patients who are lost to follow up (dropout), do not comply with their assigned rehab method based on criteria (noncompliance), or change to the other rehab method (cross-over) will be analyzed according to their original group assignment. If there is greater than 10% of data is missing, the group data will be treated according to a missing data protocol - multiple imputation method under a missing at random (MAR) assumption. Patient-reported and objective clinical outcomes will be compared between the two rehab groups using two sample t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test if assumptions are not met. Differences between rehab groups across the follow-up period will be identified using a repeated measures ANOVA, and the appropriate covariance structure will be determined using BIC, a measure of overall model fit. Categorical data including the proportions of complications will be compared between the two rehab groups using Chi-square or Fisher's Exact tests; odds ratios and 95% confidence limits will be calculated where appropriate.
- Being tested
- Patient-led rehab with short immobilization
- Keywords
- Reverse shoulder arthroplasty, Rehabilitation, Shoulder arthritis, Rotator cuff tear arthropathy
- Medical subject headings
- Rotator Cuff Tear Arthropathy
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Patient-led rehab with short immobilizationBehavioural
Short immobilization followed by patient-led shoulder rehab
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Patient-led rehab group | Experimental | Immobilization in arm sling for a short period time followed by patient-led shoulder exercises for rehab following reverse shoulder arthroplasty Receives: Behavioral: Patient-led rehab with short immobilization |
| Supervised rehab group | No intervention | Prolonged immobilization in arm sling followed by supervised physical therapy by therapists for rehab following reverse shoulder arthroplasty |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
American shoulder and elbow surgeons score at 6 months following surgery
American shoulder and elbow surgeons score at 6 months; lowest 0 point and highest 100 points; higher scores mean a better outcome
Measured: At 6 months following surgery
Secondary outcomes (1)
Complications
Proportions of patients who develop any kinds of postoperative complications
Measured: During the first 2 years following surgery
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Feb 2020
- Study start8 Jul 2020
- Primary completion16 Nov 2022
- Study completion16 Nov 2022
Why it stopped: This study was withdrawn because 1) we did not secure needed funding, and 2) the research question became less important while we were waiting for funding opportunities as a few similar studies got published. We have no plan to pursue this study.
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (12)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Rotator Cuff Tear ArthropathyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of Missouri-ColumbiaThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Missouri-Columbia
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Harry S. Truman Memorial Veterans' Hospital
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, H. Mike Kim, University of Missouri-Columbia
- Investigators
- Hyunmin M Kim, MD, Principal investigator, University of Missouri-Columbia
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04285606
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2019684MU
- Status last verified
- Nov 2022
- First submitted
- 23 Feb 2020
- Last updated
- 21 Nov 2022
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: No plan to share IPD
Publications
Westermann RW, Pugely AJ, Martin CT, Gao Y, Wolf BR, Hettrich CM. Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty in the United States: A Comparison of National Volume, Patient Demographics, Complications, and Surgical Indications. Iowa Orthop J. 2015;35:1-7.
PubMed 26361437Jain NB, Yamaguchi K. The contribution of reverse shoulder arthroplasty to utilization of primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014 Dec;23(12):1905-1912. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.06.055. Epub 2014 Oct 7.
PubMed 25304043Schairer WW, Nwachukwu BU, Lyman S, Craig EV, Gulotta LV. National utilization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015 Jan;24(1):91-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.08.026. Epub 2014 Oct 29.
PubMed 25440519Palsis JA, Simpson KN, Matthews JH, Traven S, Eichinger JK, Friedman RJ. Current Trends in the Use of Shoulder Arthroplasty in the United States. Orthopedics. 2018 May 1;41(3):e416-e423. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20180409-05. Epub 2018 Apr 16.
PubMed 29658976Boudreau S, Boudreau ED, Higgins LD, Wilcox RB 3rd. Rehabilitation following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2007 Dec;37(12):734-43. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2007.2562. Epub 2007 Aug 28.
PubMed 18560182Bullock GS, Garrigues GE, Ledbetter L, Kennedy J. A Systematic Review of Proposed Rehabilitation Guidelines Following Anatomic and Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2019 May;49(5):337-346. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2019.8616. Epub 2019 Apr 25.
PubMed 31021690Romano AM, Oliva F, Nastrucci G, Casillo P, Di Giunta A, Susanna M, Ascione F. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty patient personalized rehabilitation protocol. Preliminary results according to prognostic groups. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. 2017 Sep 18;7(2):263-270. doi: 10.11138/mltj/2017.7.2.263. eCollection 2017 Apr-Jun.
PubMed 29264337Wolff AL, Rosenzweig L. Anatomical and biomechanical framework for shoulder arthroplasty rehabilitation. J Hand Ther. 2017 Apr-Jun;30(2):167-174. doi: 10.1016/j.jht.2017.05.009.
PubMed 28641735Kwaees TA, Charalambous CP. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty--minimum age for surgery, postoperative rehabilitation and long term restrictions. A delphi consensus study. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil. 2014 Jul-Aug;16(4):435-9. doi: 10.5604/15093492.1119621.
PubMed 25404633Flurin PH, Marczuk Y, Janout M, Wright TW, Zuckerman J, Roche CP. Comparison of outcomes using anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Bull Hosp Jt Dis (2013). 2013;71 Suppl 2:101-7.
PubMed 24328590Mulieri PJ, Holcomb JO, Dunning P, Pliner M, Bogle RK, Pupello D, Frankle MA. Is a formal physical therapy program necessary after total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis? J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010 Jun;19(4):570-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.07.012. Epub 2009 Oct 2.
PubMed 19800258Sershon RA, Van Thiel GS, Lin EC, McGill KC, Cole BJ, Verma NN, Romeo AA, Nicholson GP. Clinical outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients aged younger than 60 years. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014 Mar;23(3):395-400. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2013.07.047. Epub 2013 Oct 12.
PubMed 24129052
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Nov 2022. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effect of Different Postoperative Rehab Methods on Clinical Outcomes Following Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04285606
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2019684MU
- Keywords
- Reverse shoulder arthroplasty, Rehabilitation, Shoulder arthritis, Rotator cuff tear arthropathy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- WithdrawnReason stopped: This study was withdrawn because 1) we did not secure needed funding, and 2) the research question became less important while we were waiting for funding opportunities as a few similar studies got published. We have no plan to pursue this study.
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Missouri-ColumbiaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Harry S. Truman Memorial Veterans' Hospital
- Study start
- 8 Jul 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 16 Nov 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 16 Nov 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Feb 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Notwithstanding the rapid increase in utilization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), little consensus or high-quality evidence exists regarding optimal rehab methods following the procedure. Our research question is how different rehab methods influence the clinical outcomes following RTSA. This proposal presents a prospective randomized clinical trial where 100 eligible RTSA patients will be randomly assigned to two rehab groups (Short immobilization with patient-directed therapy vs Long immobilization with supervised therapy) at a single institution. Patient-reported outcomes, objective clinical data, and complications will be compared between the groups over a period of 2 years.
Detailed description
The investigators will perform a prospective randomized non-blinded clinical study where the investigators will recruit a total of 100 patients undergoing RTSA at our institution according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two rehab groups (50 in each group) - short immobilization combined with patient-directed home therapy (Patient-led rehab) vs long immobilization combined with supervised physical therapy (Supervised rehab) - using a randomization protocol developed by our biostatistics department. The group assignment will be kept sealed in an envelope until the day of surgery to blind both the patients and surgeons.
Surgical procedure and postoperative rehabilitation Enrolled patients will undergo RTSA with one of the two shoulder and elbow surgeons under general anesthesia combined with interscalene block. A standard deltopectoral approach will be used, and the subscapularis tendon will be repaired using transosseous sutures if it is reparable. Tornier reverse shoulder arthroplasty system (Ascent Flex humeral stem with 132.5°inclincation angle, standard Perform Reversed glenoid components, and standard polyethylene liner) will be used in all patients. The size of the humeral stem, baseplate, glenosphere, and polyethylene liner will be chosen on the basis of the patient's anatomy. A sling with an abduction pillow will be used for postoperative immobilization in 30° abduction and 45° internal rotation in all patients. The patient-led rehab group will be educated on their postoperative rehab in detail prior to surgery. The detailed rehab methods for each group are as follows.
- Patient-led rehab group Duration of the sling: 1 week in sling with abduction pillow for immobilization; then optional for comfort only Start of shoulder exercise: Within 1 week of surgery once pain subsides Mode of rehab: Patients performing exercises on their own following instructions Phase 1 (3-5 days to 2 weeks): Pendulum, deltoid and periscapular muscle isometric strengthening Phase 2 (2-4 weeks): passive, active assisted motion Phase 3 (4-8 weeks): Active motion Phase 4 (8-12 weeks): Strengthening
- Supervised rehab group Duration of the sling: 4 weeks in sling with abduction pillow for immobilization; then optional for comfort only Start of shoulder exercise: At 4 weeks after surgery Mode of rehab: Patients attending outpatient physical therapy sessions led by therapists Phase 1 (0-4 weeks): Immobilization in sling Phase 2 (4-8 weeks): Passive, active assisted motion Phase 3 (8-12 weeks): Active motin Phase 4 (12-16 weeks): Strengthening
Postoperative outcome evaluation Strict adherence to the rehab protocol will be encouraged and monitored during the rehab period. The research coordinator will contact patients twice a week for the first 2 weeks and then once a week for the following 2 weeks. Patients will be given a pain diary where they will record their pain levels daily along with their daily narcotic use for the first 2 weeks. Patients will return for follow-up, undergo x-rays, and will be evaluated at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years. The following data will be obtained during the study period.
- Pain measured using a visual analog scale daily for the first 2 weeks; then at each follow-up visit
- Patient-reported outcomes: ASES, QuickDASH, SANE, and PROMIS at each visit except at 2 weeks.
- Range of motion: forward elevation, external rotation, internal rotation at each visit except at 2 weeks
- Radiographic findings of failure such as dislocation, implant dislodgement, migration, or loosening, scapular notching, periprosthetic humuerus fracture, or scapular fracture at any time: Will be included as complications
- Complications such as instability, hematoma, wound healing issue, abnormal level of pain due to rehab method at any time, or reoperation
- Overall patient satisfaction with their rehab method using a 5-point Likert-type scale at 6 months (Question: Were you satisfied with your rehab method? Very unsatisfied, slightly unsatisfied, neutral, somewhat satisfied, very satisfied)
Statistical analysis Sample size calculation: Sample size was calculated to examine the superiority of patient-led rehab over supervised rehab. The null hypothesis is that there is no difference in the primary outcome measure (ASES score at 6 months) between the two rehab methods. Considering similar protocols in the literature12-14 and a mean difference in ASES scores of 11 points with corresponding standard deviation of 18 points, a minimum of 100 patients (50 for each group) are needed to achieve at least 80% power using a two-sided type I error of 0.05. These numbers account for a 10% patient attrition.
Statistical methods: Intention-to-treat analysis will be used for this randomized clinical trial study. Patients who are lost to follow up (dropout), do not comply with their assigned rehab method based on criteria (noncompliance), or change to the other rehab method (cross-over) will be analyzed according to their original group assignment. If there is greater than 10% of data is missing, the group data will be treated according to a missing data protocol - multiple imputation method under a missing at random (MAR) assumption. Patient-reported and objective clinical outcomes will be compared between the two rehab groups using two sample t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test if assumptions are not met. Differences between rehab groups across the follow-up period will be identified using a repeated measures ANOVA, and the appropriate covariance structure will be determined using BIC, a measure of overall model fit. Categorical data including the proportions of complications will be compared between the two rehab groups using Chi-square or Fisher's Exact tests; odds ratios and 95% confidence limits will be calculated where appropriate.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Patient-led rehab group | Experimental | Behavioral: Patient-led rehab with short immobilizationImmobilization in arm sling for a short period time followed by patient-led shoulder exercises for rehab following reverse shoulder arthroplasty |
| Supervised rehab group | No intervention | –Prolonged immobilization in arm sling followed by supervised physical therapy by therapists for rehab following reverse shoulder arthroplasty |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Aged 18 years or older
- Diagnosed with rotator cuff arthropathy, glenohumeral osteoarthritis with a > 1.5-cm rotator cuff tear, or massive irreparable rotator cuff tear
- Have a normal functioning deltoid
- Have preserved teres minor function (a negative Hornblower's sign)
- Have failed conservative management for >3 months
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- younger than 18 years
- chronic opiate use history
- fibromyalgia or other conditions that increase susceptibility to pain
- preoperative stiffness (definition: < 30 degree passive external rotation, < 90 degree passive forward elevation), neurologic disorder affecting the ipsilateral upper extremity,
- RTSA for acute proximal humerus fracture or fracture sequelae (nonunion, malunion)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Patient-led rehab with short immobilizationShort immobilization followed by patient-led shoulder rehab | Behavioural | Patient-led rehab group |
Primary outcome
American shoulder and elbow surgeons score at 6 months following surgery
Time frame: At 6 months following surgery
American shoulder and elbow surgeons score at 6 months; lowest 0 point and highest 100 points; higher scores mean a better outcome
1 secondary outcome
Complications
Time frame: During the first 2 years following surgery
Results and safety
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 21 Nov 2022.
- Background: PubMed 26361437Westermann RW, Pugely AJ, Martin CT, Gao Y, Wolf BR, Hettrich CM. Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty in the United States: A Comparison of National Volume, Patient Demographics, Complications, and Surgical Indications. Iowa Orthop J. 2015;35:1-7.
- Background: PubMed 25304043Jain NB, Yamaguchi K. The contribution of reverse shoulder arthroplasty to utilization of primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014 Dec;23(12):1905-1912. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.06.055. Epub 2014 Oct 7.
- Background: PubMed 25440519Schairer WW, Nwachukwu BU, Lyman S, Craig EV, Gulotta LV. National utilization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015 Jan;24(1):91-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.08.026. Epub 2014 Oct 29.
- Background: PubMed 29658976Palsis JA, Simpson KN, Matthews JH, Traven S, Eichinger JK, Friedman RJ. Current Trends in the Use of Shoulder Arthroplasty in the United States. Orthopedics. 2018 May 1;41(3):e416-e423. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20180409-05. Epub 2018 Apr 16.
- Background: PubMed 18560182Boudreau S, Boudreau ED, Higgins LD, Wilcox RB 3rd. Rehabilitation following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2007 Dec;37(12):734-43. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2007.2562. Epub 2007 Aug 28.
- Background: PubMed 31021690Bullock GS, Garrigues GE, Ledbetter L, Kennedy J. A Systematic Review of Proposed Rehabilitation Guidelines Following Anatomic and Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2019 May;49(5):337-346. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2019.8616. Epub 2019 Apr 25.
- Background: PubMed 29264337Romano AM, Oliva F, Nastrucci G, Casillo P, Di Giunta A, Susanna M, Ascione F. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty patient personalized rehabilitation protocol. Preliminary results according to prognostic groups. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. 2017 Sep 18;7(2):263-270. doi: 10.11138/mltj/2017.7.2.263. eCollection 2017 Apr-Jun.
- Background: PubMed 28641735Wolff AL, Rosenzweig L. Anatomical and biomechanical framework for shoulder arthroplasty rehabilitation. J Hand Ther. 2017 Apr-Jun;30(2):167-174. doi: 10.1016/j.jht.2017.05.009.
- Background: PubMed 25404633Kwaees TA, Charalambous CP. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty--minimum age for surgery, postoperative rehabilitation and long term restrictions. A delphi consensus study. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil. 2014 Jul-Aug;16(4):435-9. doi: 10.5604/15093492.1119621.
- Background: PubMed 24328590Flurin PH, Marczuk Y, Janout M, Wright TW, Zuckerman J, Roche CP. Comparison of outcomes using anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Bull Hosp Jt Dis (2013). 2013;71 Suppl 2:101-7.
- Background: PubMed 19800258Mulieri PJ, Holcomb JO, Dunning P, Pliner M, Bogle RK, Pupello D, Frankle MA. Is a formal physical therapy program necessary after total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis? J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010 Jun;19(4):570-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.07.012. Epub 2009 Oct 2.
- Background: PubMed 24129052Sershon RA, Van Thiel GS, Lin EC, McGill KC, Cole BJ, Verma NN, Romeo AA, Nicholson GP. Clinical outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients aged younger than 60 years. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014 Mar;23(3):395-400. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2013.07.047. Epub 2013 Oct 12.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. No plan to share IPD
Related trials for Rotator Cuff Tear Arthropathy
Active, not recruiting
Lyophilized Platelet-Rich Plasma Lysate vs Dextrose Prolotherapy for Partial Rotator Cuff Tears
Rotator Cuff Tear, Rotator Cuff Syndrome
Active, not recruiting
Efficacy and Safety of Digital Therapeutics for Improving Shoulder Function After Rotator Cuff Repair
Rotator Cuff Tear Arthropathy, Repair of a Cuff Tear
RecruitingObservational study
Evaluating Hemidiaphragmatic Paralysis With Prolonged Neural Blockade From an Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block
Shoulder Surgery, Shoulder Pain
Enrolling by invitationPhase 1
Stem Cell Treatment for Regeneration of the Rotator Cuff (Lipo-Cuff Study)
Rotator Cuff Tears, Rotator Cuff Injuries
RecruitingObservational study
Exactech Shoulder Post Market Clinical Follow-up Study
Osteo Arthritis Shoulders, Osteonecrosis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Hyunmin M Kim, MD principal investigator
University of Missouri-Columbia
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Patient-led rehab with short immobilization in people with Rotator Cuff Tear Arthropathy and Shoulder Osteoarthritis, run by University of Missouri-Columbia at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 9 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: withdrawn, as of the sponsor's last update on 21 Nov 2022. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
American shoulder and elbow surgeons score at 6 months following surgery (time frame: At 6 months following surgery). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04285606, which also lists 12 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 21 Nov 2022; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 6 Nov 2026.