Search

Background: Standardized consensus-based radiological reports for shoulder instability may improve clinical quality, reduce heterogeneity, and reduce workload. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine important elements for the x-ray, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) arthrography (MRA), and computed tomography (CT) report, the extent of variability, and important MRI views and settings. Methods: An expert panel of musculoskeletal radiologists and orthopedic surgeons was recruited in a three-round Delphi design. Important elements were identified for the x-ray, MRA, and CT report and important MRI views and setting. These were rated on a 0-9 Likert scale. High variability was defined as at least one score between 1-3 and 7-9. Consensus was reached when ≥80% scored an element 1-3 or 7-9. Results: The expert panel consisted of 21 musculoskeletal radiologists and 15 orthopedic surgeons. The number of elements identified in the first round was seventeen for the x-ray report, 52 for MRA, 21 for CT, and 23 for the MRI protocol. The number of elements that reached consensus was five for x-ray, twenty for MRA, nine for CT, and two for the MRI protocol. High variability was observed in 76.5% (n = 13) x-ray elements, 85.0% (n = 45) MRA, 76.2% (n = 16) CT, and 85.7% (n = 18) MRI protocol. Conclusion: Substantial variability was observed in the scoring of important elements in the radiological for the evaluation of anterior shoulder instability, regardless of modality. Consensus was reached for five elements in the x-ray report, twenty in the MRA report, and nine in the CT report. Finally, consensus was reached on two elements regarding MRA views and settings.

Background: The aim of this study was to identify items that healthcare providers and/or patients consider important to include in a questionnaire for clinical trials and cohort studies in shoulder instability research. This could serve as a basis to develop a core outcome set for shoulder instability research. Methods: Healthcare providers and patients were included in a panel for a modified Delphi consensus study. The study consisted of three rounds, comprising (1) identifying items, (2) rating the importance of the items, and (3) rating the importance again after seeing a summary of the results of round two. Importance was rated on a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as ≥ 80% of the panel giving a score of 7 or higher. Results: In total, 44 healthcare providers and 30 patients completed all three rounds. Round one identified 54 items. After round three, the panel reached a consensus on 11 items that should be included in a questionnaire, comprising re-dislocation (99%), instable feeling of the shoulder (96%), limitations during sport (93%), patient satisfaction with the shoulder (93%), fear/anxiety for re-dislocation (91%), range of motion (88%), return to old level of functioning (85%), performing daily activities (85%), return to sport (82%), return to work (82%), and trusting the shoulder (81%). Conclusion: Healthcare providers and patients reached a consensus on 11 items that should be included in a questionnaire for shoulder instability research. These items can facilitate design and development of future clinical trials and form the basis for the development of a core outcome set.

Background: Standardized reporting leads to high-quality data and can reduce administration time. The aim of this study was to (1) get an insight into the variability of what is considered important to report in the surgical report following shoulder instability surgery and (2) determine which elements should be included in the surgical report following shoulder instability surgery according to Dutch surgeons using a Delphi method. Methods: Dutch orthopedic shoulder surgeons were included in a panel for a Delphi study consisting of 3 rounds. Importance of the elements was rated on a 9-point Likert scale. High variability was defined as an element that received at least 1 score between 1 and 3 and 1 score between 7 and 9 in round 3. Consensus was defined as ≥80% of the panel giving a score of 7 or more. Results: Seventeen shoulder specialists completed all 3 rounds and identified a total of 82 elements for the arthroscopic Bankart repair and 60 for the open Latarjet. High variability was observed in 57 (70%) and 52 (87%) of the elements, respectively. After round 3, the panel reached consensus on 27 and 11 elements that should be mentioned in the surgical report following arthroscopic Bankart repair and open Latarjet. Conclusion: There is high variability in what shoulder specialists regard essential to report. Consensus was reached on 27 and 11 elements to be reported following arthroscopic Bankart repair and open Latarjet, respectively. Future studies on an international scale can further improve data collection and communication between specialists.