Table 2

Primary comparison arthroscopic subacromial decompression (ASD) versus diagnostic arthroscopy (DA): outcomes of the trial at 5 years follow-up

ASD
(n=53)
DA
(n=55)
Between group difference,
ASD versus DA
P value
Primary outcomes
 Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, at rest6.2 (1.6 to 10.8)8.2 (3.5 to 12.8)−2.0 (−8.5 to 4.6)0.56
 VAS score, on arm activity12.4 (5.8 to 19.0)20.4 (13.8 to 26.9)−8.0 (−17.3 to 1.3)0.093
Secondary outcomes
 Constant-Murley score82.8 (78.4 to 87.3)75.7 (71.3 to 80.1)7.1 (0.9 to 13.4)0.025
 Simple shoulder test score10.7 (10.1 to 11.3)10.3 (9.7 to 11.0)0.3 (−0.5 to 1.2)0.45
 15D score0.90 (0.89 to 0.92)0.92 (0.90 to 0.93)−0.01 (−0.03 to 0.01)0.32
 SF-36 score
  Physical health84.0 (80.6 to 87.4)85.4 (82.0 to 88.8)−1.4 (−6.1 to 3.4)0.58
  Mental health79.9 (76.9 to 82.9)80.1 (77.0 to 83.2)−0.2 (−4.5 to 4.1)0.92
 Proportion of patients able to return to previous leisure activities*0.91 (0.83 to 0.98)0.86 (0.76 to 0.95)0.05 (−0.07 to 0.17)0.40
 Proportion of responders†0.99 (0.95 to 1.0)0.91 (0.84 to 0.99)0.07 (−0.01 to 0.15)0.080
 Patients’ satisfaction with treatment‡89.7 (84.5 to 94.9)85.7 (80.6 to 90.8)4.0 (−3.2 to 11.3)0.28
 No (%) complications and adverse effects§3 (5)2 (3)
  • Values are means with 95% CIs unless otherwise indicated. A lower score indicates the desired (better) treatment outcome in pain VAS score and complications, while a higher score indicates the same in all other outcomes. Between-group differences may not exactly equal the difference in changes in score between the ASD and diagnostic arthroscopy groups because of the adjustment for baseline imbalance in the mixed-effects model.

  • *Patients ability to return to previous leisure activities was assessed with the following question: ‘Have you been able to return to your previous leisure activities?’ (‘yes’ or ‘no’).

  • †Patients’ satisfaction with the treatment outcome was elicited with a question: ‘How satisfied are you with the outcome of your treatment?’ on a 5-item scale. Patients who reported very satisfied or satisfied were categorised as ‘Responders’.

  • ‡Patients’ global assessment of satisfaction to the treatment was elicited with this question: ‘Are you satisfied with the treatment you have received?’ We used a VAS ranging from 0 (completely disappointed) to 100 (very satisfied).

  • §Complications directly related to the interventions were registered.