N. prodotti: 0
Totale ordine: € 0,00
Indexed/Abstracted in: Chemical Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,111
Online ISSN 1827-1928
SPORT INJURIES AND REHABILITATION
Capuano L. 1, Poulain S. 1, Hardy P. 1, Longo U. G. 2, Denaro V. 2, Maffulli N. 3
1 Orthopaedic Department, Ambroise Paré Hospital, West Paris University, Boulogne, France;
2 Department of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Campus Biomedico University, Rome, Italy;
3 Queen Mary University of London Barts and, The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, William Harvey, Research Institute Centre for Sports and Exercise Medicine Mile End Hospital, London, UK
AIM:The aim of this study was to assess the functional outcome of patients who had undergone elbow arthroscopy, evaluating the correlation between three elbow scoring systems and the patients’ subjective perception of satisfaction
METHODS: Fourteen patients who had undergone elbow arthroscopy were retrospective reviewed to evaluate the correlation between three elbow scoring systems and the patients’ subjective perception of satisfaction at a mean follow-up time of 24 months (range 12-64 months). Two independent orthopedic surgeons evaluated all patients using three elbow scoring systems, a simple satisfaction question and a visual analogue scale.
RESULTS: The three scoring systems showed significant correlation with each other (P<0.05). There was no correlation between the results of the three scoring systems and patients’ satisfaction: patients with the same level of satisfaction could perform differently at the scoring systems.
CONCLUSION:Although the three scoring systems used to evaluate the patients showed significant correlation with each other, they failed to correlate to patients’ satisfaction. In reporting the results of arthroscopic elbow procedures, emphasis should be placed on individual variables, rather than on global elbow ratings. Further studies are needed to develop a single outcome evaluation system which is reliable, valid and sensitive to changes of clinical importance, which takes into account both patients’ and physicians perspective, and which is short and practical to use.