Table 3. Summary of findings.
Arthroscopic vs open-mini repair for rotator cuff tears (3-month).
| Population: patients with rotator cuff tears. Settings: inpatient clinics. Intervention: arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Comparison: mini-open rotator cuff repair. Follow up: 3-months. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Outcomes | SMD / MD (95% C.I.) | No of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) |
| Function: DASH, Constant, WORC: (0 to 100). Higher values indicate better function | SMD 0.00 (-0.18–0.18) | 495 (4 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low1,2,4 |
| Pain: VAS (0–10) Lower values indicate improved pain. | MD -0.21 (-0.91–0.50) | 254 (3 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low1,2,4 |
| Range of motion: (forward flexion—degrees) Higher values indicate better range of motion. | MD 4.26 (-0.56–9.09) | 555 (5 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low1,2,3,4 |
| Range of motion: (external rotation—degrees) Higher values indicate better range of motion. | MD 1.13 (-2.08–4.33) | 522 (4 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low1,2,3,4 |
1We downgraded by one level due to high risk of bias.
2We downgraded by one level due to a relatively small sample size.
3We downgraded by one level due to indirectness (surrogate outcomes).
4We downgraded by one level due to publication bias.
Abbreviations: VAS; visual analogue scale, DASH; Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand, WORC; western Ontario rotator cuff index, SMD; standardized mean difference, MD; mean difference, CI; confidence interval.