This clinical trial focuses on testing the efficacy of different digital interventions to promote re-engagement in cancer-related long-term follow-up care for adolescent and young adult (AYA) survivors of childhood cancer.
The primary objective of this prospective randomized controlled trial is to compare pain and functional outcomes between two surgical modalities for irreparable rotator cuff tears as measured by the pain visual analog scale (VAS), simple shoulder test (SST), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgery shoulder score (ASES), and Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) 29 score at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months post-operatively. The two surgical modalities of interest are partial rotator cuff repair alone and partial rotator cuff repair with superior capsule reconstruction (SCR). The secondary objective of this study is determine the failure rate of partial repair alone vs. partial repair with SCR via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 12 months post-operatively. The information gained from this investigation will be useful to discern if SCR provides any benefit to patients with irreparable rotator cuff tears. The investigators hypothesize that there is no statistically significant difference in pain and functional outcomes between partial rotator cuff repair alone versus partial rotator cuff repair with SCR. In addition, the investigators hypothesize that the failure rate will be significantly higher in patients undergoing partial rotator cuff repair with SCR.
Comparison of Partial Rotator Cuff Repair vs. Superior Capsular Reconstruction for Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears
Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.
| Inclusion Criteria | Exclusion Criteria |
|---|---|
|
|
Sponsor: Robert J. Gillespie
These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.