Skip to main content
. 2020 Sep 18;117(38):633–640. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2020.0633

eTable 2. GRADE evidence profile.

Certainty of evidence Summary of findings
Number of patients (studies). follow-up Risk of bias Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision Other aspects Certainty of evidence Number of patients RR (95% CI) Baseline (control group) MD
(surgically treated)
Control Surgery
a: Randomized controlled trials. Study setting: Adults with full-thickness rotator cuff tears from Finland. Norway. Netherlands
Shoulder function (Constant score. 0–100 points. 100 points = best result)
257 (3).
1 year
Not serious Not serious Not serious Serious*1 None MODERATE 131 126 - 38.4–57.1 6.7 higher*2
(2.3 to 11.0 higher)
210 (2).
2 years
Not serious Not serious Not serious Serious*1 None MODERATE 105 105 - 38.4–57.1 4.4 higher*2
(0.1 to 8.8 higher)
101 (1).
5 years
Not serious Not serious Not serious Serious*1 None MODERATE 50 51 - 38,4 8.7 higher*2
(1.3 to 16.1 higher)
91 (1).
10 years
Not serious Not serious Not serious Serious*1 None MODERATE 48 43 - 38,4 11.8 higher*2
(5.2 to 18.4 higher)
Shoulder pain (VAS. 0–10 cm. 0 is best result)
257 (3).
1 year
Serious*3 Not serious Not serious Serious*1 None LOW 131 126 - 2.7–6.3 1.1 lower*2
(0.5 to 1.7 lower)
210 (2).
2 years
Serious*3 Not serious Not serious Serious*1 None LOW 105 105 - 2.7–5.3 0.9 lower*2
(0.3 to 1.5 lower)
101 (1).
5 years
Serious*3 Not serious Not serious Serious*1 None LOW 50 51 - 5.3 1.3 lower*2
(0.5 to 2.1 lower)
91 (1).
10 years
Serious*3 Not serious Not serious Serious*1 None LOW 48 43 - 5,3 2.0 lower*2
(1.0 to 3.0 lower)
Range of motion (Constant subscore. 0–40 points. 40 is best result)
110 (1).
1 year
Not serious Not serious Not serious Serious*4 None MODERATE 55 55 - 29,3 0.1 lower
(0.5 lower to
0.3 higher)
109 (1).
2 years
Not serious Not serious Not serious Serious*4 None MODERATE 55 54 - 29.3 0.2 lower
(0.5 lower to
0.2 higher)
Range of motion (Goniometer. pain-free flexion in degrees)
91 (1).
10 years
Not serious Not serious Not serious Serious*5 None MODERATE 48 43 - 81,9 15.6 higher*2
(0.8 to 32 higher)
Muscle strength (Constant subscore. 0–25 points. 25 is best result)
212 (2).
1 year
Not serious Not serious Not serious Serious*4 None MODERATE 106 106 - 8.1–8.4 0.4 lower
(2.0 lower to
1.3 higher)
210 (2).
2 years
Not serious Not serious Not serious Serious*4 None MODERATE 105 105 - 8.1–8.4 0.1 higher
(1.6 lower to
1.8 higher)
101 (1).
5 years
Not serious Not serious Not serious Serious*4 None MODERATE 50 51 - 8,1 1.3 higher
(1.2 lower to
3.8 higher)
Adverse events: longest follow-up
255 (3) Serious*3 Not serious Not serious Serious*4 None LOW 5/130 (3.8%) 7/125 (5.6%) 1.4 [0.5; 4.0] 38 per 1000 17 more per 1000
(20 fewer to
127 more)
b: Non-randomized controlled intervention studies. Study setting: Adults with full-thickness rotator cuff tears from Canada. Italy. Korea. Japan. USA
Shoulder function (Constant score. 0–100 points. 100 is best result)
38 (1).
1.5 years
Very serious*6 Not serious Not serious Serious*7 None VERY LOW 18 20 - 47 11.6 higher*2
(8.8 to 14.3 higher)
35 (1).
4.5 years
Very serious*6 Not serious Not serious Very serious*7 None VERY LOW 18 17 - Not reported 7.6 higher*2
(1.2 to 14.0 higher)
Shoulder pain (VAS. 0–10 cm. 0 is best result)
229 (1).
1 year
Very serious*6 Not serious Not serious Serious*4 None VERY LOW 114 115 - 7,1 0.1 lower
(0.5 lower to
0.3 higher)
137 (1).
0.8 years
Very serious*6 Not serious Not serious Very serious*8 None VERY LOW 33 104 - Not reported 0.5 lower
(1.5 lower to
0.5 higher)
Range of motion (JOA subscore. 0–30 points. 30 is best result)
40 (1).
4 years
Very serious*6 Not serious Not serious Very serious*8 None VERY LOW 14 26 - 18 2.7 higher
(1.5 lower to
6.9 higher)

CI. confidence interval; JOA. Japanese Orthopedic Association; MD. mean difference considering the change between the baseline and follow-up measurement of each treatment arm; RR. risk ratio; VAS. visual analog scale

*1 Insufficient precision (wide confidence interval). downgraded by one level: concerns regarding clinical relevance of results. the smallest clinically relevant difference for the endpoint shoulder pain (measured with the Constant score) is 10.4 points and for pain (measured with the VAS). ≥ 1.4 cm

*2 Effect in favor of surgical treatment

*3 Risk of bias. downgraded by one level: concerns regarding lack of blinding. particularly for subjective endpoints (pain and adverse events)

*4 Insufficient precision (wide confidence interval). downgraded by one level: wide 95% CI consistent with both the possibility of benefit (improving symptoms) and the possibility of harm (worsening symptoms)

*5 Insufficient precision (very wide confidence interval). downgraded by one level

*6 Risk of bias. downgraded by two levels: serious confounding. selection bias. and lack of blinding

*7 Insufficient precision (wide confidence interval). downgraded by two levels: concerns regarding clinical relevance of results and low number of patients

*8 Insufficient precision (wide confidence interval). downgraded by two levels: wide 95% CI consistent with both the possibility of benefit (improving symptoms) and the possibility of harm (worsening symptoms). plus low number of patients (endpoint range of motion) or variable group size (endpoint pain)