. 2023 Dec 7;11:1229646. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1229646

TABLE 5.

The effect of subscapularis repair on the restoration rate of the anterior-posterior joint contact force in comparison with 3 models.

Type of tears	Classification	Observed angle (degree)	Number of classifications	Restoration rate (%)
Type A	Restoration ^a	90°/105°	2	25
	Non-restoration ^a ^, ^b	15°/30°/45°/60°/75°/120°	6
	Not applicable	-	0
Type B	Restoration ^a	-	0	0
	Non-restoration ^a ^, ^b	15°/30°/45°/60°/75°/90°/105°/120°	8
	Not applicable	-	0
Type C	Restoration ^a	-	0	0
	Non-restoration ^a ^, ^b	15°/30°/45°/60°/75°/90°/105°/120°	8
	Not applicable	-	0
Type D	Restoration ^a	-	0	0
	Non-restoration ^a ^, ^b	15°/30°/45°/60°/75°/90°/105°/120°	8
	Not applicable	-	0
Type E	Restoration ^a	-	0	0
	Non-restoration ^a ^, ^b	15°/30°/45°/60°	4
	Not applicable	75°/90°/105°/120°	4

Type A: isolated bundle tear of the supraspinatus; Type B: Type A + superior bundle tear of the infraspinatus; Type C: Type B + middle bundle tear of the infraspinatus; Type D: Type C + entire bundle tear of the infraspinatus; Type E: Type D + entire bundle tear of the teres minor.

^{^a}

Significant differences between intact rotator cuff and subscapularis-torn models (p < .05).

^{^b}

Significant differences between intact rotator cuff and subscapularis-repaired models (p < .05).