Abstract
The use of scoring systems for surveillance of post-operative outcomes is increasing. However, the methodology of this follow-up is not universal. We set out to assess whether a postal Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) was sufficient to identify patients who were dissatisfied and wanted further treatment.
Of 88 patients who had undergone GlobalCap resurfacing in the previous 5 years, we received a completed postal OSS (Median score 33, Range 5–48) from 80 patients. Those with a score <24 (an agreed threshold for surgery pre-operatively) were brought to clinic for review.
The 16 recalled patients (2 males, 14 females; age 58–85) had their OSS repeated, supervised by a clinic nurse, and had a Constant Score and an American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Score performed. Satisfaction was also questioned.
OSS correlated well with the Constant Score (r=0.79) and ASES (r=0.86). However, supervision increased the OSS by an average of 6 points (Mean 13.9 to 19.9) and only three of the patients proved dissatisfied with the outcome of their surgery.
Used alone, an unobserved OSS may have limited value for this purpose and the use of comparative pre-operative scores or additional patient-reported outcome measures may be necessary to detect poor outcomes.
