Abstract:The American Journal of Sports Medicine, Volume 52, Issue 1, Page 207-214, January 2024. Background:Posterior glenohumeral instability is an increasingly recognized cause of shoulder pain and dysfunction among young, active populations. Outcomes after posterior stabilization procedures are commonly assessed using patient-reported outcome measures including the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), the Rowe instability score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. The clinical significance thresholds for these measures after arthroscopic posterior labral repair (aPLR), however, remain undefined.Purpose:We aimed to define the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for the SANE, Rowe score, and ASES score as well as the VAS pain after aPLR. Additionally, we sought to determine preoperative factors predictive of reaching, as well as failing to reach, clinical significance.Study Design:Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:This study was a retrospective analysis of patient-reported outcome scores collected from patients who underwent aPLR between January 2011 and December 2018. To determine the clinically significant threshold that corresponded to achieving a meaningful outcome, the MCID, SCB, and PASS were calculated for the SANE, Rowe score, ASES score, and VAS pain utilizing either an anchor- or distribution-based method. Additionally, univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the factors associated with achieving, or not achieving, the MCID, SCB, and PASS.Results:A total of 73 patients with a mean follow-up of 82.55 ± 24.20 months were available for final analysis. MCID, SCB, and PASS values for the VAS pain were 1.10, 6, and 3, respectively; for the ASES score were 7.8, 34, and 80, respectively; for the SANE were 10.15, 33, and 85, respectively; and for the Rowe score were 11.3, 60, and 90, respectively. To meet the MCID, male sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.1639; P = .0293) was found to be a positive predictor for the VAS pain, and a lower preoperative SANE score (OR, 0.9939; P = .0003) was found to be a negative predictor for the SANE. Dominant arm involvement was associated with lower odds of achieving the PASS for the ASES score (OR, 0.7834; P = .0259) and VAS pain (OR, 0.7887; P = .0436). Patients who reported a history of shoulder trauma were more likely to reach the PASS for the SANE (OR, 1.3501; P = .0089), Rowe score (OR, 1.3938; P = .0052), and VAS pain (OR, 1.3507; P = .0104) as well as the SCB for the ASES score (OR, 1.2642; P = .0469) and SANE (OR, 1.2554; P = .0444). A higher preoperative VAS pain score was associated with higher odds of achieving the SCB for both the VAS pain (OR, 1.1653; P = .0110) and Rowe score (OR, 1.1282; P = .0175). Lastly, concomitant biceps tenodesis was associated with greater odds of achieving the SCB for the ASES score (OR, 1.3490; P = .0130) and reaching the PASS for the SANE (OR, 1.3825; P = .0038) and Rowe score (OR, 1.4040; P = .0035).Conclusion:To our knowledge, this study is the first to define the MCID, SCB, and PASS for the ASES score, Rowe score, SANE, and VAS pain in patients undergoing aPLR. Furthermore, we found that patients who reported a history of shoulder trauma and those who underwent concomitant biceps tenodesis demonstrated a greater likelihood of achieving clinical significance. Dominant arm involvement was associated with lower odds of achieving clinical significance.

Effect of age and gender in rates of achieving minimal clinically important difference and patient‐acceptable symptom state 2 years after arthroscopic superior capsular reconstruction

Effect of Patient Characteristics on the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State Thresholds After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Superior Capsular Reconstruction Using Fascia Lata Autograft Versus Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients 65 Years and Older With Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Time Required to Achieve Clinically Significant Outcomes After Anteroinferior Arthroscopic Capsular Release for Shoulder Adhesive Capsulitis

A Comparative Study on Arthroscopic Superior Capsular Reconstruction Using Fascia Lata Autograft With and Without Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Augmentation: Two-Year Patient-Reported Outcomes and Radiographic Analysis

Reaching Minimal Clinically Important Difference, Substantial Clinical Benefit, and Patient-Acceptable Symptomatic State for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures following Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Does Not Correlate with Patient Satisfaction

Establishing Clinically Significant Improvement for Patients After Arthroscopic Surgery for Shoulder Instability With Large Labral Tears

Establishing the Minimal Clinically Important Difference, Substantial Clinical Benefit, and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State After Arthroscopic Posterior Labral Repair for Posterior Glenohumeral Instability

Several factors predict the achievement of the patient acceptable symptom state and minimal clinically important difference for patient‐reported outcome measures following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review

Determining the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for Shoulder Strength After Subscapularis Arthroscopic Repair and Evaluating the Preoperative Predictors for PASS Achievement

Defining minimal clinically important difference, patient acceptable symptomatic state and substantial clinical benefit for the visual analog scale pain score after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

Functional results of Circumferential Capsular Release in adhesive shoulder capsulitis. Comparative study of patients over and under fifty years of age

Improved Acromiohumeral Distance Independently Predicts Better Outcomes After Arthroscopic Superior Capsular Reconstruction Graft Tears

Similar two‐year improvement in patient‐reported outcomes in patients 40 years and older with outerbridge grade III and IV lesions following ACL reconstruction

Establishing Clinical Significance for Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Repair of Type II SLAP Lesions

Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Arthroscopic Superior Capsular Reconstruction Versus Primary Rotator Cuff Repair in Massive Rotator Cuff Tears: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

Outcomes of primary arthroscopic shoulder stabilization in active patients over 40-results at a mean follow-up of 7 years

Factors associated with patient satisfaction after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: do they differ by age?

Variability of MCID, SCB, and PASS Thresholds in Studies Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes After Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review

Preoperative patient-reported outcome measures predict minimal clinically important difference and patient-acceptable symptomatic state following arthroscopic Bankart repair

Sex-Based Differences in Clinical Outcomes after Arthroscopic Anterior Shoulder Stabilization: Results at 5-Year Follow-up.