Psychosocial Factors, Lifestyle and Central Pain Processing as Potential Predictors of Outcome for Rotator Cuff Repair
NCT ID: NCT04946149
Last Updated: 2022-08-19
Study Results
Results pending
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
Recruitment Status
COMPLETED
Total Enrollment
142 participants
Study Classification
OBSERVATIONAL
Study Start Date
2019-01-01
Study Completion Date
2022-05-10
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The influence of modifiable psychosocial and lifestyle factors and the role of central pain processing (CPP) on outcome after rotator cuff repair (RCR) is not well enough established to formulate holistic prognosis. Modern pain neuroscience emphasises to explain musculoskeletal shoulder pain biopsychosocially, which seems short when looking at the yearly RCR increase. This study will explore modifiable psychosocial and lifestyle factors and CPP as potential predictors for outcome after RCR.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
The Impact of Psychological Factors on the Outcome of Surgical Repair for Rotator Cuff
NCT03018210
Rotator Cuff Tear
UNKNOWN
Preoperative Psychological Risk Factors for the Retractable Capsulitis of the Shoulder After Shoulder Rotator Cuff Repair Surgery
NCT04044196
Frozen Shoulder
Rotator Cuff Tears
COMPLETED
Risk Factors for Asymptomatic Rotator Cuff Tears to Become Symptomatic.
NCT05896475
Rotator Cuff Tears
RECRUITING
Which Factors Influence the Outcome After Anatomical and Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty?
NCT04258267
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Shoulder
RECRUITING
NA
Results of Rotator Cuff Repair
NCT01549912
Shoulder Dislocation
COMPLETED
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Shoulder pain is the third most common musculoskeletal disorder seen in primary care with low recovery rates (50-60%) 12 to 18 months post onset. Rotator cuff (RC) disorders are the most common amongst shoulder pain patients with a life-time prevalence of around 70%. There is a lack of consensus concerning the cause of shoulder pain, as many people present with structural changes of their RC, yet they do not suffer pain. Reports from the United States acknowledge that only one third of RC lesions are symptomatic. RC degeneration measured in cadavers, increases rapidly from the age of 50 to 55, peaking at 80 years. Contrary to this observed increasing mechanistic change, the pain curve from the age of 65 onwards. This decrease in pain implies that shoulder pain is not solely based upon the presence of a RC tear, or other underlying structural changes.
Patients who demonstrate structural changes of their RC, are still predominantly treated using biomedical reasoning. There was a reported 270,000 annual surgeries in the USA and an increase of 204% in rotator cuff repairs (RCR) between 1998 and 2011 in Finland. Satisfactory outcomes ranged from 38% to 95%. Biomedical prognostic indicators dominate the orthopaedic research on outcomes post RCR. Biomedical factors include; arm function (e.g. muscle strength), radiological findings (e.g. tear size) or demographics (e.g. age). This assertion was backed by a systematic review and meta-analysis regarding prognosis post RCR, where mainly anatomical and functional shoulder factors were analysed.
Despite the reliance on biomedical indicators, there is a growing body of evidence about the impact of psychosocial factors on persistent shoulder pain, and on outcomes after RCR. The biopsychosocial model first described by Engel in the 1970's incorporates multiple dimensions and explains illness or disease based upon biomedical, psychological and social determinants of health. The perception of high job demand, poor social support, baseline high distress, maladaptive pain beliefs such as catastrophic thinking and pain self-efficacy can lead to persistent shoulder pain and disability. The absence of psychological distress is also associated with improved self-efficacy ("the capacity to produce important effects"), and lower levels of pain and disability. However, studies on the influence of psychosocial factors post RCR, demonstrate weak interactions. Patients with existing preoperative psychological conditions like depression and anxiety or cognitive psychological factors like pain catastrophizing and kinesiophobia, and psychological distress demonstrate higher pre-operative pain levels.
High patients' expectations of a positive outcome post RCR show independent and strong associations to satisfactory outcomes after RCR, measured in pain and disability, and performance at one-year post-op. However, it is unclear which circumstances lead to high or low expectations and how one should measure these. Low expectations in conservative treatments like physiotherapy, can be influenced by the patients' biomedical oriented attitudes and beliefs towards pain and disability. High expectations on outcome post RCR may be further driven by the failure of conservative treatments (e.g. Physiotherapy).
Sleep disturbance is highly prevalent in rotator cuff related shoulder pain patients and shoulder pain was found to be a strong predictor for sleep disturbance. RCR seems to reduce this vicious interplay between pain and sleep as findings demonstrate an overall post RCR improvement of sleep quality. The same study did not find any predictive power for insomnia on outcome post RCR.
The relationship between CPP measures such as central sensitisation (CS), or quantitative sensory testing (QST) and prolonged shoulder pain have been established.
To conclude, in the literature there is a lack of knowledge about modifiable psychosocial and lifestyle factors and CPP for predicting outcome after RCR. Clinicians need an improved explanatory model to predict successful outcomes post RCR. Neither the local tissue pathology-pain model nor the growing knowledge about local biochemical changes in the tendons, sufficiently describe the relationship between tissue changes and perceived shoulder pain. There is insufficient understanding to what extent cognitive psychological factors like pain catastrophizing, high perceived stress or low self-efficacy may influence outcome after RCR and whether or not they drive high or low patients' expectations (psychosocial factor) for surgery. The role of sleep on outcome after RCR remains obscure. Finally, the association of CPP with prolonged recovery post RCR is unknown.
This study aims to support the understanding of psychosocial factors and their influence on outcome after RCR. The investigators hypothesise that psychosocial factors, lifestyle factors and CPP do play a role in individual prognosis for outcome after RCR. If modifiable psychosocial or lifestyle related factors such as patients' expectations on surgery, catastrophic pain thinking, high perceived stress, altered injury perceptions, sleep disturbance or altered central pain processing are identified as predictors for post RCR outcome, clinicians might tailor treatment and potentially patient selection for RCR based upon improved factors and hypothetically reduce the number of persistent shoulder pain patients one year after onset.
This study aims to answer the following questions:
1. Is there an association between psychosocial factors including expectations, lifestyle factors such as sleep and CPP with outcome (quality of life, pain and disability) after RCR at 12 weeks and 12 months?
2. To what extent do these pre-interventional variables predict post-operative RCR outcome at 12 weeks and 12 months? Methods Study Design and setting The study will be implemented and reported in line with the STROBE statement for observational studies.
Data are obtained monocentric in the shoulder and elbow surgery unit in the clinic of orthopaedic surgery and traumatology in alliance with the institute of therapy and rehabilitation of the acute care hospital, "Kantonsspital Winterthur" in Switzerland.
The current research project will analyze data from three selected time points of this clinical routine of the RCR management; 2-3 weeks preoperative (T1), 12 weeks postoperative (T2) and 12 months postoperative (T3). Data from January 2019 will be considered. Data collection will be stopped after the inclusion of 141 individual datasets with 12 months follow up, estimated to be completed in late Spring 2022.
Demographic variables such as age, gender, and profession and comorbidities, including diabetes, rheumatological disease, cardiovascular disease, and neurological disease, will be registered.
The investigators will use a mixed-effects regression model for repeated measures. This will have the power to detect a moderate effect size that is still clinically relevant (15% difference in WORC score) with confidence level α=0.5, (two-tailed) and a desired power of 90%. The required total sample size was calculated to be 125 subjects (Edland). Mixed models do not require complete datasets to produce accurate results, but the statistical analysts have accounted for potential attrition. Given an expected drop-out rate of approximately 12.5%, a total number of 141 patients is needed. The power is set at 90% to minimize the chance of making a type II error.
Statistical Methods and Analysis Statistical analyses will be performed using RStudio. Level of significance is set at p = 0.05. Appropriate descriptive statistics will be performed. Measurements will take place at three time points in the perioperative management, as described above (T1 = at baseline 2-3 weeks prior to RCR, T2 = at 12 weeks post RCR and T3 = at 12 months post RCR as follow-up).
The primary outcome (WORC) will be analysed using multilevel linear regression models for repeated (longitudinal) measures, using an unstructured covariance matrix. Dependent variables are the primary and secondary outcomes. Continuous secondary outcomes will be assessed in a similar way to the primary outcome. The models will be developed by stepwise reduction of the potential predictors (for, psychosocial factors, sleep and CPP). Categorical data (e.g. EQ-5D-5L) will be analysed using logistic models. For non-repeated continuous and binary measurements, ordinary linear regression and logistic models will be used, respectively. Six predictors as clustered variables will be studied. The psychosocial variables are: 1) expectation, 2) pain catastrophizing, 3) perceived stress, 4) illness perceptions; the lifestyle factor; 5) sleep and 6) central pain processing (see table 2 for more detail).
Data security and management Data generation, transmission, storage and analysis within this project strictly follow Swiss legal requirements for data protection. The electronic data capture (EDC) software REDCap (www.project---redcap.org) will be used for data processing and management. Appropriate coded identification (e.g. pseudonymisation) is used in order to enter subject data into the database. The coding list of target data is saved in a secured folder on the hospital's server.
Ethics The study underlies the principles of the Helsinki Declaration. Only data of patients who gave general consent to the hospital or informed written consent to the project will be considered for analysis. Ethical approval received January 2019 (ID 2018-02089) by the Ethical Committee of the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland.
Patients who demonstrate structural changes of their RC, are still predominantly treated using biomedical reasoning. There was a reported 270,000 annual surgeries in the USA and an increase of 204% in rotator cuff repairs (RCR) between 1998 and 2011 in Finland. Satisfactory outcomes ranged from 38% to 95%. Biomedical prognostic indicators dominate the orthopaedic research on outcomes post RCR. Biomedical factors include; arm function (e.g. muscle strength), radiological findings (e.g. tear size) or demographics (e.g. age). This assertion was backed by a systematic review and meta-analysis regarding prognosis post RCR, where mainly anatomical and functional shoulder factors were analysed.
Despite the reliance on biomedical indicators, there is a growing body of evidence about the impact of psychosocial factors on persistent shoulder pain, and on outcomes after RCR. The biopsychosocial model first described by Engel in the 1970's incorporates multiple dimensions and explains illness or disease based upon biomedical, psychological and social determinants of health. The perception of high job demand, poor social support, baseline high distress, maladaptive pain beliefs such as catastrophic thinking and pain self-efficacy can lead to persistent shoulder pain and disability. The absence of psychological distress is also associated with improved self-efficacy ("the capacity to produce important effects"), and lower levels of pain and disability. However, studies on the influence of psychosocial factors post RCR, demonstrate weak interactions. Patients with existing preoperative psychological conditions like depression and anxiety or cognitive psychological factors like pain catastrophizing and kinesiophobia, and psychological distress demonstrate higher pre-operative pain levels.
High patients' expectations of a positive outcome post RCR show independent and strong associations to satisfactory outcomes after RCR, measured in pain and disability, and performance at one-year post-op. However, it is unclear which circumstances lead to high or low expectations and how one should measure these. Low expectations in conservative treatments like physiotherapy, can be influenced by the patients' biomedical oriented attitudes and beliefs towards pain and disability. High expectations on outcome post RCR may be further driven by the failure of conservative treatments (e.g. Physiotherapy).
Sleep disturbance is highly prevalent in rotator cuff related shoulder pain patients and shoulder pain was found to be a strong predictor for sleep disturbance. RCR seems to reduce this vicious interplay between pain and sleep as findings demonstrate an overall post RCR improvement of sleep quality. The same study did not find any predictive power for insomnia on outcome post RCR.
The relationship between CPP measures such as central sensitisation (CS), or quantitative sensory testing (QST) and prolonged shoulder pain have been established.
To conclude, in the literature there is a lack of knowledge about modifiable psychosocial and lifestyle factors and CPP for predicting outcome after RCR. Clinicians need an improved explanatory model to predict successful outcomes post RCR. Neither the local tissue pathology-pain model nor the growing knowledge about local biochemical changes in the tendons, sufficiently describe the relationship between tissue changes and perceived shoulder pain. There is insufficient understanding to what extent cognitive psychological factors like pain catastrophizing, high perceived stress or low self-efficacy may influence outcome after RCR and whether or not they drive high or low patients' expectations (psychosocial factor) for surgery. The role of sleep on outcome after RCR remains obscure. Finally, the association of CPP with prolonged recovery post RCR is unknown.
This study aims to support the understanding of psychosocial factors and their influence on outcome after RCR. The investigators hypothesise that psychosocial factors, lifestyle factors and CPP do play a role in individual prognosis for outcome after RCR. If modifiable psychosocial or lifestyle related factors such as patients' expectations on surgery, catastrophic pain thinking, high perceived stress, altered injury perceptions, sleep disturbance or altered central pain processing are identified as predictors for post RCR outcome, clinicians might tailor treatment and potentially patient selection for RCR based upon improved factors and hypothetically reduce the number of persistent shoulder pain patients one year after onset.
This study aims to answer the following questions:
1. Is there an association between psychosocial factors including expectations, lifestyle factors such as sleep and CPP with outcome (quality of life, pain and disability) after RCR at 12 weeks and 12 months?
2. To what extent do these pre-interventional variables predict post-operative RCR outcome at 12 weeks and 12 months? Methods Study Design and setting The study will be implemented and reported in line with the STROBE statement for observational studies.
Data are obtained monocentric in the shoulder and elbow surgery unit in the clinic of orthopaedic surgery and traumatology in alliance with the institute of therapy and rehabilitation of the acute care hospital, "Kantonsspital Winterthur" in Switzerland.
The current research project will analyze data from three selected time points of this clinical routine of the RCR management; 2-3 weeks preoperative (T1), 12 weeks postoperative (T2) and 12 months postoperative (T3). Data from January 2019 will be considered. Data collection will be stopped after the inclusion of 141 individual datasets with 12 months follow up, estimated to be completed in late Spring 2022.
Demographic variables such as age, gender, and profession and comorbidities, including diabetes, rheumatological disease, cardiovascular disease, and neurological disease, will be registered.
The investigators will use a mixed-effects regression model for repeated measures. This will have the power to detect a moderate effect size that is still clinically relevant (15% difference in WORC score) with confidence level α=0.5, (two-tailed) and a desired power of 90%. The required total sample size was calculated to be 125 subjects (Edland). Mixed models do not require complete datasets to produce accurate results, but the statistical analysts have accounted for potential attrition. Given an expected drop-out rate of approximately 12.5%, a total number of 141 patients is needed. The power is set at 90% to minimize the chance of making a type II error.
Statistical Methods and Analysis Statistical analyses will be performed using RStudio. Level of significance is set at p = 0.05. Appropriate descriptive statistics will be performed. Measurements will take place at three time points in the perioperative management, as described above (T1 = at baseline 2-3 weeks prior to RCR, T2 = at 12 weeks post RCR and T3 = at 12 months post RCR as follow-up).
The primary outcome (WORC) will be analysed using multilevel linear regression models for repeated (longitudinal) measures, using an unstructured covariance matrix. Dependent variables are the primary and secondary outcomes. Continuous secondary outcomes will be assessed in a similar way to the primary outcome. The models will be developed by stepwise reduction of the potential predictors (for, psychosocial factors, sleep and CPP). Categorical data (e.g. EQ-5D-5L) will be analysed using logistic models. For non-repeated continuous and binary measurements, ordinary linear regression and logistic models will be used, respectively. Six predictors as clustered variables will be studied. The psychosocial variables are: 1) expectation, 2) pain catastrophizing, 3) perceived stress, 4) illness perceptions; the lifestyle factor; 5) sleep and 6) central pain processing (see table 2 for more detail).
Data security and management Data generation, transmission, storage and analysis within this project strictly follow Swiss legal requirements for data protection. The electronic data capture (EDC) software REDCap (www.project---redcap.org) will be used for data processing and management. Appropriate coded identification (e.g. pseudonymisation) is used in order to enter subject data into the database. The coding list of target data is saved in a secured folder on the hospital's server.
Ethics The study underlies the principles of the Helsinki Declaration. Only data of patients who gave general consent to the hospital or informed written consent to the project will be considered for analysis. Ethical approval received January 2019 (ID 2018-02089) by the Ethical Committee of the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Rotator Cuff Tear or Rupture, Not Specified as Traumatic
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
Observational Model Type
COHORT
Study Time Perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Scheduled for elective arthroscopic RCR;
* First time RCR on the target shoulder;
* Completed primary and secondary outcome measures (Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC), Constant Score, Maximum Pain on Numeric Rating Scale and EQ-5D-5L) from daily routine.
* First time RCR on the target shoulder;
* Completed primary and secondary outcome measures (Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC), Constant Score, Maximum Pain on Numeric Rating Scale and EQ-5D-5L) from daily routine.
Exclusion Criteria
* Changes of intra operative procedure (e.g. anything but RCR)
* Re-repair of tendon;
* No surgery;
* Other pain-related or neurological comorbidities that could interfere with pain measures;
* Re-repair of tendon;
* No surgery;
* Other pain-related or neurological comorbidities that could interfere with pain measures;
Minimum Eligible Age
18 Years
Eligible Sex
ALL
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Universiteit Antwerpen
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
Kantonsspital Winterthur KSW
OTHER
Sponsor Role
lead
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Ariane Schwank
Clinical Specialist upper extremity, Physiotherapy / Physical Therapist, Master of Science
Responsibility Role
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Ariane Schwank, MSc
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Kantonsspital Winterthur KSW
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Kantonsspital Winterthur
Winterthur, Canton of Zurich, Switzerland
Site Status
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Switzerland
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Coronado RA, Seitz AL, Pelote E, Archer KR, Jain NB. Are Psychosocial Factors Associated With Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Patients With Rotator Cuff Tears? A Systematic Review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018 Apr;476(4):810-829. doi: 10.1007/s11999.0000000000000087.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Vincent K, Leboeuf-Yde C, Gagey O. Are degenerative rotator cuff disorders a cause of shoulder pain? Comparison of prevalence of degenerative rotator cuff disease to prevalence of nontraumatic shoulder pain through three systematic and critical reviews. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2017 May;26(5):766-773. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2016.09.060. Epub 2017 Jan 12.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Bury J, Littlewood C. Rotator cuff disorders: a survey of current (2016) UK physiotherapy practice. Shoulder Elbow. 2018 Jan;10(1):52-61. doi: 10.1177/1758573217717103. Epub 2017 Jul 11.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Jain NB, Higgins LD, Losina E, Collins J, Blazar PE, Katz JN. Epidemiology of musculoskeletal upper extremity ambulatory surgery in the United States. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014 Jan 8;15:4. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-4.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Paloneva J, Lepola V, Aarimaa V, Joukainen A, Ylinen J, Mattila VM. Increasing incidence of rotator cuff repairs--A nationwide registry study in Finland. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015 Aug 12;16:189. doi: 10.1186/s12891-015-0639-6.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Novoa-Boldo A, Gulotta LV. Expectations Following Rotator Cuff Surgery. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2018 Mar;11(1):162-166. doi: 10.1007/s12178-018-9470-7.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Henn RF 3rd, Kang L, Tashjian RZ, Green A. Patients' preoperative expectations predict the outcome of rotator cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Sep;89(9):1913-9. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00358.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Lambers Heerspink FO, Dorrestijn O, van Raay JJ, Diercks RL. Specific patient-related prognostic factors for rotator cuff repair: a systematic review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014 Jul;23(7):1073-80. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.01.001. Epub 2014 Apr 13.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Cho CH, Song KS, Hwang I, Warner JJ. Does Rotator Cuff Repair Improve Psychologic Status and Quality of Life in Patients With Rotator Cuff Tear? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Nov;473(11):3494-500. doi: 10.1007/s11999-015-4258-1.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Raman J, Walton D, MacDermid JC, Athwal GS. Predictors of outcomes after rotator cuff repair-A meta-analysis. J Hand Ther. 2017 Jul-Sep;30(3):276-292. doi: 10.1016/j.jht.2016.11.002. Epub 2017 Feb 23.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Woollard JD, Bost JE, Piva SR, Kelley Fitzgerald G, Rodosky MW, Irrgang JJ. The ability of preoperative factors to predict patient-reported disability following surgery for rotator cuff pathology. Disabil Rehabil. 2017 Oct;39(20):2087-2096. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2016.1219396. Epub 2016 Aug 22.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Thorpe AM, O'Sullivan PB, Mitchell T, Hurworth M, Spencer J, Booth G, Goebel S, Khoo P, Tay A, Smith A. Are Psychologic Factors Associated With Shoulder Scores After Rotator Cuff Surgery? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018 Oct;476(10):2062-2073. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000389.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Noten S, Struyf F, Lluch E, D'Hoore M, Van Looveren E, Meeus M. Central Pain Processing in Patients with Shoulder Pain: A Review of the Literature. Pain Pract. 2017 Feb;17(2):267-280. doi: 10.1111/papr.12502. Epub 2016 Oct 14.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Sanchis MN, Lluch E, Nijs J, Struyf F, Kangasperko M. The role of central sensitization in shoulder pain: A systematic literature review. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2015 Jun;44(6):710-6. doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2014.11.002. Epub 2014 Nov 13.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Martinez-Calderon J, Meeus M, Struyf F, Miguel Morales-Asencio J, Gijon-Nogueron G, Luque-Suarez A. The role of psychological factors in the perpetuation of pain intensity and disability in people with chronic shoulder pain: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2018 Apr 13;8(4):e020703. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020703.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Kusnanto H, Agustian D, Hilmanto D. Biopsychosocial model of illnesses in primary care: A hermeneutic literature review. J Family Med Prim Care. 2018 May-Jun;7(3):497-500. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_145_17.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Potter MQ, Wylie JD, Greis PE, Burks RT, Tashjian RZ. Psychological distress negatively affects self-assessment of shoulder function in patients with rotator cuff tears. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014 Dec;472(12):3926-32. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3833-1. Epub 2014 Jul 31.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Dunn WR, Kuhn JE, Sanders R, An Q, Baumgarten KM, Bishop JY, Brophy RH, Carey JL, Harrell F, Holloway BG, Jones GL, Ma CB, Marx RG, McCarty EC, Poddar SK, Smith MV, Spencer EE, Vidal AF, Wolf BR, Wright RW; MOON Shoulder Group. 2013 Neer Award: predictors of failure of nonoperative treatment of chronic, symptomatic, full-thickness rotator cuff tears. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2016 Aug;25(8):1303-11. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2016.04.030.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Lawrence C, Zmistowski BM, Lazarus M, Abboud J, Williams G, Namdari S. Expectations of Shoulder Surgery Are Not Altered by Surgeon Counseling of the Patient. Joints. 2017 Aug 11;5(3):133-137. doi: 10.1055/s-0037-1605585. eCollection 2017 Sep.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Cho CH, Jung SW, Park JY, Song KS, Yu KI. Is shoulder pain for three months or longer correlated with depression, anxiety, and sleep disturbance? J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013 Feb;22(2):222-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2012.04.001. Epub 2012 Jun 26.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Gwilym SE, Oag HC, Tracey I, Carr AJ. Evidence that central sensitisation is present in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome and influences the outcome after surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011 Apr;93(4):498-502. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B4.25054.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Valencia C, Fillingim RB, Bishop M, Wu SS, Wright TW, Moser M, Farmer K, George SZ. Investigation of central pain processing in postoperative shoulder pain and disability. Clin J Pain. 2014 Sep;30(9):775-86. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000029.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Lewis J, O'Sullivan P. Is it time to reframe how we care for people with non-traumatic musculoskeletal pain? Br J Sports Med. 2018 Dec;52(24):1543-1544. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2018-099198. Epub 2018 Jun 25. No abstract available.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP; STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Ann Intern Med. 2007 Oct 16;147(8):573-7. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Buchbinder R, Page MJ, Huang H, Verhagen AP, Beaton D, Kopkow C, Lenza M, Jain NB, Richards B, Richards P, Voshaar M, van der Windt D, Gagnier JJ; Shoulder Core Outcome Set Special Interest Group. A Preliminary Core Domain Set for Clinical Trials of Shoulder Disorders: A Report from the OMERACT 2016 Shoulder Core Outcome Set Special Interest Group. J Rheumatol. 2017 Dec;44(12):1880-1883. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.161123. Epub 2017 Jan 15.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Huber W, Hofstaetter JG, Hanslik-Schnabel B, Posch M, Wurnig C. [Translation and psychometric testing of the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC) for use in Germany]. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 2005 Jul-Aug;143(4):453-60. doi: 10.1055/s-2005-836677. German.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Constant CR, Gerber C, Emery RJ, Sojbjerg JO, Gohlke F, Boileau P. A review of the Constant score: modifications and guidelines for its use. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008 Mar-Apr;17(2):355-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2007.06.022. Epub 2008 Jan 22. No abstract available.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Maxwell S, Sterling M. An investigation of the use of a numeric pain rating scale with ice application to the neck to determine cold hyperalgesia. Man Ther. 2013 Apr;18(2):172-4. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2012.07.004. Epub 2012 Aug 11.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Moloney N, Hall T, Doody C. An investigation of somatosensory profiles in work related upper limb disorders: a case-control observational study protocol. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2010 Jan 30;11:22. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-11-22.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Walton DM, Macdermid JC, Nielson W, Teasell RW, Reese H, Levesque L. Pressure pain threshold testing demonstrates predictive ability in people with acute whiplash. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011 Sep;41(9):658-65. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2011.3668. Epub 2011 Sep 1.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Mayer TG, Neblett R, Cohen H, Howard KJ, Choi YH, Williams MJ, Perez Y, Gatchel RJ. The development and psychometric validation of the central sensitization inventory. Pain Pract. 2012 Apr;12(4):276-85. doi: 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2011.00493.x. Epub 2011 Sep 27.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Scerbo T, Colasurdo J, Dunn S, Unger J, Nijs J, Cook C. Measurement Properties of the Central Sensitization Inventory: A Systematic Review. Pain Pract. 2018 Apr;18(4):544-554. doi: 10.1111/papr.12636. Epub 2017 Nov 20.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Timmerman H, Steegers MAH, Huygen FJPM, Goeman JJ, van Dasselaar NT, Schenkels MJ, Wilder-Smith OHG, Wolff AP, Vissers KCP. Investigating the validity of the DN4 in a consecutive population of patients with chronic pain. PLoS One. 2017 Nov 30;12(11):e0187961. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187961. eCollection 2017.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Meyer K, Sprott H, Mannion AF. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the German version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale. J Psychosom Res. 2008 May;64(5):469-78. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2007.12.004.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Klein EM, Brahler E, Dreier M, Reinecke L, Muller KW, Schmutzer G, Wolfling K, Beutel ME. The German version of the Perceived Stress Scale - psychometric characteristics in a representative German community sample. BMC Psychiatry. 2016 May 23;16:159. doi: 10.1186/s12888-016-0875-9.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Broadbent E, Wilkes C, Koschwanez H, Weinman J, Norton S, Petrie KJ. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire. Psychol Health. 2015;30(11):1361-85. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2015.1070851. Epub 2015 Aug 26.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Leysen M, Nijs J, Meeus M, Paul van Wilgen C, Struyf F, Vermandel A, Kuppens K, Roussel NA. Clinimetric properties of illness perception questionnaire revised (IPQ-R) and brief illness perception questionnaire (Brief IPQ) in patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review. Man Ther. 2015 Feb;20(1):10-7. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2014.05.001. Epub 2014 May 14.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Collins GH, Crawford SJ. Sarcocystis in goats: prevalence and transmission. N Z Vet J. 1978 Nov;26(11):288. doi: 10.1080/00480169.1978.34571. No abstract available.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Blackwell E, de Leon CF, Miller GE. Applying mixed regression models to the analysis of repeated-measures data in psychosomatic medicine. Psychosom Med. 2006 Nov-Dec;68(6):870-8. doi: 10.1097/01.psy.0000239144.91689.ca. Epub 2006 Nov 1.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Edland SD, Ard MC, Sridhar J, Cobia D, Martersteck A, Mesulam MM, Rogalski EJ. Proof of concept demonstration of optimal composite MRI endpoints for clinical trials. Alzheimers Dement (N Y). 2016 Sep;2(3):177-181. doi: 10.1016/j.trci.2016.05.002.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Schwank A, Struyf F, Struyf T, Mertens M, Gisi D, Benninger E, Meeus M. Psychosocial Factors, Sleep, and Central Pain Processing for Making a Prognosis About Recovery of Pain, Function, and Quality of Life After Rotator Cuff Repair: An Exploratory Longitudinal Study. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2024 Aug;54(8):530-540. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2024.12398.
Reference Type
DERIVED
Schwank A, Struyf T, Struyf F, Blazey P, Mertens M, Gisi D, Pisan M, Meeus M. Are psychosocial variables, sleep characteristics or central pain processing prognostic factors for outcome following rotator cuff repair? A protocol for a prospective longitudinal cohort study. BMJ Open. 2022 Aug 4;12(8):e058803. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058803.
Reference Type
DERIVED
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
ID2018-02089
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.
Rotator Cuff Surgical Outcomes in Women
NCT02725320
UNKNOWN
Surgical Safety and Effectiveness in Orthopedics: Swiss-wide Multicenter Evaluation and Prediction of Core Outcomes in Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Reconstruction
NCT04321005
COMPLETED
Do Relaxation Exercises Decrease Postoperative Pain After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair?
NCT04249089
COMPLETED
NA
A Pilot Study Comparing Two Rehabilitation Approaches for Individuals With Irritable Shoulder Pain
NCT06467123
COMPLETED
NA
Prospective Sensor Controlled Compliance Analysis of Shoulder Abduction Splint After Rotator Cuff Repair
NCT03054753
COMPLETED
NA
Post-operative Mobilisation After Rotator Cuff Repair
NCT02943005
UNKNOWN
NA
Evaluation of Functional and Biomechanical Outcome by Shear-wave Elastography in the Short to Intermediate Follow-up After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair
NCT05691374
RECRUITING
Rehabilitation After Rotator Cuff Repair
NCT02261701
COMPLETED
NA
A Pilot Randomized Trial of Pain Neuroscience Education in the Rehabilitation After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair
NCT04522934
COMPLETED
NA
Clinical & Radiological Assessment of Rotator Cuff Healing After Single Row Vs. Double Row Rotator Cuff Repair
NCT03885856
COMPLETED
Early Active Rehabilitation After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair
NCT02915588
COMPLETED
NA
Multifactorial Approach Training for Anterior Shoulder Instability in Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Bankart Repair
NCT06157229
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
Biomarkers for the Surgical Treatment of Rotator Cuff Tears
NCT02123784
UNKNOWN
Rotator Cuff Repair With Arthroscopic Acromioplasty (Shaving the Acromion Bone) Versus Repair Without Acromioplasty
NCT00664794
COMPLETED
NA
Role of Anxio-depressive History on Return to Work and Sport After Rotator Cuff Surgery
NCT05531929
COMPLETED
Enhanced Function and Quality of Life Following 5 Months of Exercise Therapy for Patients With Rotator Cuff Tears
NCT02740946
COMPLETED
NA
Validation of the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index in Patients With Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair
NCT01532492
COMPLETED
Progressive Active Exercise After Surgical Rotator Cuff Repair
NCT02969135
COMPLETED
NA
Assessment of Muscle Function and Size in Older Adults With Rotator Cuff Tear
NCT01459536
COMPLETED
Neuropathy of the Suprascapular Nerve Before and After Reconstruction of the Cuff
NCT03953339
COMPLETED
NA
Rotator Cuff Pathway
NCT03717753
COMPLETED
NA
Outcomes After Repair of Acute Rotator Cuff Tears
NCT01140230
COMPLETED
Workers Compensation Board: Rotator Cuff Tear Management
NCT01498198
UNKNOWN
NA
SupraScapular Cuff Study: Assessing the Effects of Size and Type of Rotator Cuff Tear on Suprascapular Nerve Function
NCT06002009
RECRUITING
Central Neuromuscular Dysfunction, Functionality, Psychological Status and Rotator Cuff Surgery
NCT05566470
ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION