Patient-reported outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a comparative risk factor analysis of improved versus unimproved cases

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare characteristics of patients who reported to be subjectively unimproved vs. improved after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: Data were derived from a prospective registry of patients who underwent reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients were asked to rate their subjective satisfaction and then divided into those who were unchanged or worse (unimproved group [UG]) vs. better or much better (improved group [IG]). The groups were compared for differences in demographic characteristics, preoperative factors, functional outcomes, and complications. RESULTS: There were 1425 patients in the IG and 134 patients in the UG. Patients in the IG were more likely to have a diagnosis of osteoarthritis. Patients in the UG were more likely to have coronary artery disease and diabetes and to have undergone prior surgery. No differences in implant configuration were found between groups. Preoperative measures for patients in the UG were worse for pain and function but not for range of motion. The outcomes in patients in the UG were worse for all postoperative measures, as well as for preoperative-to-postoperative improvement. Of the patients in the UG, 48% continued to have moderate to severe pain postoperatively. The complication rate was significantly higher in the UG. DISCUSSION: Up to 8.5% of patients rate themselves as unimproved after surgery. These patients are more likely to have certain comorbidities and to have undergone prior surgery. Although outcomes were significantly worse for all measures in the UG, improvement occurred in all measures despite patients subjectively being worse or unchanged. Residual pain and difficulty sleeping play a substantial role in subjective assessment of overall outcome.