Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Scoring systems for shoulder conditions

A A Romeo1, B R Bach, K L O'Halloran

  • 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush-Presbyterian St. Luke's Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois 60612, USA.

The American Journal of Sports Medicine
|July 1, 1996
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Arthroscopic soft tissue reconstruction in anterior shoulder instability.

Der Orthopade·2018
Same author

Evaluation of fever in the immediate post-operative period following shoulder arthroplasty.

The bone & joint journal·2017
Same author

Comparative outcomes of outpatient and inpatient total shoulder arthroplasty: an analysis of the Medicare dataset.

The bone & joint journal·2017
Same author

Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature.

Musculoskeletal surgery·2016
Same author

Lyme Disease in a Young Girl.

The Physician and sportsmedicine·2016
Same author

Chronic Acromioclavicular Joint Pain.

The Physician and sportsmedicine·2016
Same journal

Reliability and Clinical Validity of a Morphology-Based Classification System for Radial Meniscal Tears: A Multicenter Observer Study.

The American journal of sports medicine·2026
Same journal

Comparison of Long-term Supraspinatus Tear Progression After Arthroscopic Isolated Subscapularis Repair With and Without Comma Tissue Preservation: A Minimum 10-Year MRI Follow-up Study.

The American journal of sports medicine·2026
Same journal

The Long-term Radiographic Fate of the Chronically ACL-Deficient Knee: Response.

The American journal of sports medicine·2026
Same journal

The Long-term Radiographic Fate of the Chronically ACL-Deficient Knee: Letter to the Editor.

The American journal of sports medicine·2026
Same journal

Metformin Reduces the Incidence of Shoulder Stiffness After Arthroscopic RC Repair: Letter to the Editor.

The American journal of sports medicine·2026
Same journal

Metformin Reduces the Incidence of Shoulder Stiffness After Arthroscopic RC Repair: Response.

The American journal of sports medicine·2026
See all related articles

Comparing shoulder scoring systems reveals significant variations in patient outcome assessments. A universally accepted system is crucial for reliable shoulder condition management research.

Area of Science:

  • Orthopedics
  • Sports Medicine
  • Clinical Outcomes Research

Background:

  • Standardized outcome measurement is vital in shoulder surgery.
  • Current shoulder scoring systems lack consistent comparability.
  • No consensus exists on the optimal system for evaluating shoulder stabilization procedures.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To assess the comparability of four widely used shoulder scoring systems in the United States.
  • To identify variations in patient outcome reporting based on the chosen scoring system.
  • To highlight the need for a standardized shoulder assessment tool.

Main Methods:

  • Evaluation of 53 shoulder stabilization procedures in 52 patients.
  • Application of four distinct scoring systems: Rowe, modified-Rowe, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), and pre-1994 American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scales.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of interrater reliability and correlation between the scoring systems.

    • Main Results:

    • Significant variations in patient outcome reporting were observed across the four systems.
    • Excellent results were reported for 85% of patients using the UCLA scale versus 38% using the modified-Rowe scale.
    • Poor correlation and interrater reliability were found between the evaluated shoulder scoring systems.

    Conclusions:

    • The choice of shoulder scoring system can significantly bias study results.
    • The lack of a universally accepted system hinders comparative analysis of shoulder condition management.
    • A standardized, widely accepted shoulder scoring system is urgently needed to improve research consistency and clinical decision-making.