Table 3.

Meta-analysis of clinical outcomes: double-row versus single-row rotator cuff repair.^a

	Single Row			Double Row
Endpoint	nb	Mean	SD	nb	Mean	SD	Point Estimate	SE of Estimate	95% CI
Constant
Burks2	20	77.8	9	20	74.4	18.4	−3.40	4.58	−12.79, 5.99
Charousset3	35	80.7	9.6	31	82.7	9.6	2.00	2.37	−2.73, 6.73
Park20	40	76.68	8.56	38	79.66	4.52	2.98	1.54	−0.1, 6.06
Overall							2.24	1.24	−0.19, 4.68
ASES
Burks2	20	85.9	14	20	85.5	20	−0.40	5.46	−11.49, 10.69
Park20	40	91.6	4.48	38	92.97	2.27	1.37	0.80	0.23, 2.97
Overall							1.33	0.79	−0.22, 2.88
UCLA
Burks2	20	28.6	3.6	20	29.5	5.6	0.90	1.49	−2.13, 3.93
Franceschi9	26	32.9	1.17	26	33.3	0.97	0.40	0.30	−0.2, 1.0
Overall							0.42	0.29	−0.15, 0.99

^aMeta-analysis of mean diff (double row minus single row). ASES, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons; UCLA, University of California, Los Angeles; CI, confidence interval.

^bSample size.