IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i13p6316-d1189006.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparison Study of the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index, and the Constant–Murley Score with Objective Assessment of External Rotator Muscle Strength and Pain in Patients after Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair

Author

Listed:
  • Agnieszka Bejer

    (Institute of Health Sciences, College of Medical Sciences, University of Rzeszow, 35-959 Rzeszow, Poland
    The Holy Family Specialistic Hospital, 36-060 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Jędrzej Płocki

    (The Holy Family Specialistic Hospital, 36-060 Rzeszow, Poland
    Department of Physiotherapy, Collegium Medicum, University of Information Technology and Management in Rzeszow, 35-225 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Mirosław Probachta

    (The Holy Family Specialistic Hospital, 36-060 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Ireneusz Kotela

    (Institute of Health Sciences, Collegium Medicum, The Jan Kochanowski University, 25-317 Kielce, Poland
    Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Central Clinical Hospital of the Ministry of Interior, 02-507 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Andrzej Kotela

    (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Central Clinical Hospital of the Ministry of Interior, 02-507 Warsaw, Poland
    Faculty of Medicine, Collegium Medicum, Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University, 01-938 Warsaw, Poland)

Abstract

Although rotator cuff injures are often associated with a limited range of motion and muscle weakness, being able to conduct pain-free and efficient performances of the activities as part of daily living seems to be more important for patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the correlation between two questionnaires—the disease-specific, subjective questionnaire termed the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC), and the shoulder-specific, subjective-objective questionnaire Constant–Murley score (CMS), with the objective assessment of external rotator muscle strength, and the subjective assessment of pain according to the visual analog scale (VAS) in patients after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. The study was carried out among 47 patients twice—6 and 12 months after surgery, respectively. All patients completed the WORC, the CMS, and the VAS. Isokinetic evaluation of the external rotators was performed using the Biodex 4 ProSystem. The correlations of all assessed muscle strength parameters with both the CMS and the WORC were found to be statistically significant, being mostly average during the 1st examination and mostly strong during the 2nd examination. There was a significant improvement in all assessed tools as a result of the undertaken rehabilitation. There were weak correlations present between changes in the WORC and changes in the external rotator muscle strength, with correlations between WORC-Sport and EXT90 0 -AVERAGE-POWER and PEAK-TORQUE also being found statistically significant. Correlations of changes in the CMS scale with changes in the external rotator muscle strength were weak and statistically insignificant. It seems that the WORC questionnaire can be recommended more for the population after rotator cuff repair, which allows for a reliable assessment of patients’ ability to function and its changes in various areas of life, and at the same time does not require a direct assessment by a clinician or researcher.

Suggested Citation

  • Agnieszka Bejer & Jędrzej Płocki & Mirosław Probachta & Ireneusz Kotela & Andrzej Kotela, 2023. "A Comparison Study of the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index, and the Constant–Murley Score with Objective Assessment of External Rotator Muscle Strength and Pain in Patients after Arthroscopic Rotato," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(13), pages 1-12, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:13:p:6316-:d:1189006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/13/6316/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/13/6316/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:13:p:6316-:d:1189006. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.