Characteristics of anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty patients who achieve ceiling scores with 3 common patient-reported outcome measures.

Background: Legacy shoulder outcome scores have postoperative ceiling scores effects when quantifying clinical outcomes for anatomic (aTSA) and reverse (rTSA) total shoulder arthroplasty patients. This study uses data from an international database of a single shoulder prosthesis using data from 30 different clinical sites to quantify and compare the percentage of aTSA and rTSA patients achieving postoperative ceiling scores with multiple outcome measures and defines the patient demographics, comorbidities, implant, and operative parameters associated with ceiling scores for each outcome measure.

Methods: Clinical outcomes for 1817 aTSA and 2635 rTSA patients between 2007 and 2019 were quantified with the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Constant, and Shoulder Arthroplasty Smart (SAS) scores. The number of aTSA and rTSA patients with ceiling scores were calculated and sorted into those that achieved ceiling scores with the SST, ASES, and UCLA measures and compared to patients without ceiling scores. A univariate and multivariate analysis then identified the patient demographics, comorbidities, and implant and operative parameters associated with ceiling scores for each outcome measure.

Results: aTSA patients achieved ceiling scores at a significantly greater rate than rTSA patients for all outcome measures, except SAS. The SST score was the most susceptible to ceiling scores (aTSA = 43.4%, rTSA = 34.1%, P < .0001), followed by the ASES (aTSA = 23.7%, rTSA = 13.3%, P < .0001) and UCLA (aTSA = 22.2%, rTSA = 10.6%, P < .0001) scores. Ceiling scores were least likely with the Constant (aTSA = 0.4%, rTSA = 0%, P = .0060) and SAS (aTSA = 0.1%, rTSA = 0%, P = .0750) scores. Male patients had a significantly higher ceiling score rate than female patients using the SST and ASES scores, and no differences in ceiling score rates were observed with the UCLA, Constant, or SAS scores. Finally, we identified numerous patient demographic, comorbidity, implant, and operative parameters associated with SST, ASES, and UCLA ceiling scores for aTSA and rTSA patients.

Conclusions: Postoperative ceiling scores occur at a high rate for aTSA and rTSA patients with the SST, ASES, and UCLA scores. Those most susceptible to ceiling scores are aTSA patients treated with cage glenoids, aTSA patients of lower body mass index, rTSA patients of male gender, rTSA patients with osteoarthritis diagnosis, and rTSA patients with subscapularis repair. Clinical researchers should consider using alternative scores, such as the SAS score, to ensure a more normalized distribution of data and more accurately quantify aTSA and rTSA outcomes.