TABLE 1.
Summary of Study Designs, Level of Evidence, and Methodologic Weaknesses a
| Lead Author (Year) | Data Collection | Data Abstraction | Comparative Group | MINORS Score | Study Design (LOE) | Methodologic Weakness |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alech-Tournier (2019) 1 | Retrospective | Retrospective | No | 10 | Case series (4) | Changed fixation angle in chronic cases from 60° to 90° |
| Frank (2019) 4 | Retrospective comparative | Retrospective | Yes | 19 | Cohort (3) | Several patients lost to follow-up; no preoperative clinical scores; research assistant not blinded |
| Goyal (2020) 6 | Retrospective | Retrospective | No | 10 | Case series (4) | No preoperative scores; analysis not differentiated between surgical techniques |
| Morrell (2012) 13 | Retrospective | Retrospective | No | 8 | Case series (4) | Not all patients had strength testing; ROM and complications were the only consistent outcome measures for all patients; lacking methodological details |
| Morrey (2014) 15 | Retrospective comparative | Retrospective | Yes | 16 | Cohort (3) | Poor postoperative outcome measures (MEPS and ROM), satisfaction, return to work; stratified according to flexion fixation and not chronicity |
| Phadnis (2016) 18 | Prospective | Retrospective | No | 12 | Case series (4) | Incomplete preoperative scores (11/21 preoperative quickDASH) |
| Rantanen (1999) 20 | Retrospective | Retrospective | No | 10 | Case series (4) | No PROMs; multiple surgical techniques used but analysis not stratified accordingly |
| Ryhänen (2006) 21 | N/A | Retrospective | No | 8 | Case series (4) | Data collection not reported (retrospectively or prospectively); no PROMs; main focus on strength and ROM |
| Samra (2020) 23 | Retrospective | Retrospective | No | 10 | Case series (4) | Focus on imaging (retraction distance of distal biceps tendon); less clinically oriented; subgroup analysis excluded long-term tears (>7 wk); chronic defined as >4 wk |
| Snir (2013) 25 | Retrospective | Retrospective | No | 8 | Case series (4) | Strength and a few PROMs collected; strength testing was not objective |
| Wang (2016) 26 | Retrospective | Retrospective | No | 5 | Case series (4) | Database study using CPT codes; focus on complications only |
| Zeman (2020) 27 | Retrospective | Prospective | No | 11 | Case series (4) | Bias of examiner evaluating the strength |
a CPT, Current Procedural Terminology; LOE, level of evidence; MEPS, Mayo Elbow Performance Score; MINORS, methodological index for non-randomized studies; N/A, not available; PROM, patient-reported outcome measure; quickDASH, shortened version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand; ROM, range of motion.