These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
651 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27545048)
1. Determining the minimal clinically important difference for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test, and visual analog scale (VAS) measuring pain after shoulder arthroplasty. Tashjian RZ; Hung M; Keener JD; Bowen RC; McAllister J; Chen W; Ebersole G; Granger EK; Chamberlain AM J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2017 Jan; 26(1):144-148. PubMed ID: 27545048 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Minimal clinically important differences in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Simple Shoulder Test, and visual analog scale pain scores after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Tashjian RZ; Shin J; Broschinsky K; Yeh CC; Martin B; Chalmers PN; Greis PE; Burks RT; Zhang Y J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2020 Jul; 29(7):1406-1411. PubMed ID: 32081634 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The procedure value index: a new method for quantifying value in shoulder arthroplasty. Berglund DD; Law TY; Rosas S; Kurowicki J; Giveans MR; Mijic D; Levy JC J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2019 Feb; 28(2):335-340. PubMed ID: 30552070 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. What Change in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score Represents a Clinically Important Change After Shoulder Arthroplasty? Werner BC; Chang B; Nguyen JT; Dines DM; Gulotta LV Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2016 Dec; 474(12):2672-2681. PubMed ID: 27392769 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Quantifying success after total shoulder arthroplasty: the minimal clinically important difference. Simovitch R; Flurin PH; Wright T; Zuckerman JD; Roche CP J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2018 Feb; 27(2):298-305. PubMed ID: 29162305 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Does improved external rotation following reverse shoulder arthroplasty impact clinical outcomes in patients with rotator cuff pathology and external rotation less than 0°? Haidamous G; Cabarcas B; Ohanisian L; Simon P; Christmas KN; Wilder L; Achors K; Mighell MA; Frankle MA J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2023 Jan; 32(1):68-75. PubMed ID: 35931335 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Stratification of the minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptomatic state after total shoulder arthroplasty by implant type, preoperative diagnosis, and sex. Simovitch RW; Elwell J; Colasanti CA; Hao KA; Friedman RJ; Flurin PH; Wright TW; Schoch BS; Roche CP; Zuckerman JD J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2024 Sep; 33(9):e492-e506. PubMed ID: 38461936 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Value Analysis of Anatomic and Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty for Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis with an Intact Rotator Cuff. Polisetty TS; Colley R; Levy JC J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2021 May; 103(10):913-920. PubMed ID: 33983149 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Minimal clinically important differences in ASES and simple shoulder test scores after nonoperative treatment of rotator cuff disease. Tashjian RZ; Deloach J; Green A; Porucznik CA; Powell AP J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2010 Feb; 92(2):296-303. PubMed ID: 20124055 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Preoperative patient-reported scores can predict postoperative outcomes after shoulder arthroplasty. Wong SE; Zhang AL; Berliner JL; Ma CB; Feeley BT J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2016 Jun; 25(6):913-9. PubMed ID: 27039669 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Quantifying success after first revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: the minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptomatic state. Hao KA; Hones KM; O'Keefe DS; Saengchote SA; Burns MQ; Wright JO; Wright TW; Farmer KW; Struk AM; Simovitch RW; Schoch BS; King JJ J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2023 Oct; 32(10):e516-e527. PubMed ID: 37178967 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty performed for glenohumeral arthritis: does glenoid morphology matter? Pettit RJ; Saini SB; Puzzitiello RN; Hart PJ; Ross G; Kirsch JM; Jawa A J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2022 May; 31(5):923-931. PubMed ID: 34800669 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Quantifying success after first revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: the minimal and substantial clinically important percentage of maximal possible improvement. Hao KA; Hones KM; O'Keefe DS; Saengchote SA; Turnbull LM; Wright JO; Wright TW; Farmer KW; Struk AM; Simovitch RW; Schoch BS; King JJ J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2024 Mar; 33(3):593-603. PubMed ID: 37778654 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Anatomic and reverse shoulder arthroplasty in patients 70 years of age and older: a comparison cohort at early to midterm follow-up. Poondla RK; Sheth MM; Heldt BL; Laughlin MS; Morris BJ; Elkousy HA; Edwards TB J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2021 Jun; 30(6):1336-1343. PubMed ID: 32920109 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Substantial Inconsistency and Variability Exists Among Minimum Clinically Important Differences for Shoulder Arthroplasty Outcomes: A Systematic Review. Kolin DA; Moverman MA; Pagani NR; Puzzitiello RN; Dubin J; Menendez ME; Jawa A; Kirsch JM Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2022 Jul; 480(7):1371-1383. PubMed ID: 35302970 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Patients With Mild Osteoarthritis Are Less Likely to Achieve a Clinically Important Improvement in Pain or Function After Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty. Hill BW; Joyce CD; Singh A; Guttman MJ; Williams GR; Namdari S Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2023 Aug; 481(8):1464-1470. PubMed ID: 36853879 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Predicting outstanding results after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty using percentage of maximal outcome improvement. Berglund DD; Damodar D; Vakharia RM; Moeller EA; Giveans MR; Horn B; Mijic D; Levy JC J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2019 Feb; 28(2):349-356. PubMed ID: 30404717 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]