Comparison of Different Shoulder Scoring Systems V1

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Comparison of European and North American shoulder scoring systems

  • IRAS ID

    147993

  • Contact name

    Roger Bayston

  • Contact email

    roger.bayston@nottingham.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    University of Nottingham

  • Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier

    14115, Sponsor Reference Number

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    0 years, 5 months, 30 days

  • Research summary

    There are a large number of Shoulder Scoring systems and Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) currently being used around the world for assessing the outcomes from shoulder operations.
    Some of the currently validated systems in Europe are:-
    The Constant Murley Score (CS); the Oxford Instability Score (OSS), the Oxford Instability Score (OIS), the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Score (WOSI), the Nottingham Clavicle Score (NCS) and the Standardized Index of Shoulder Function (FI2S)
    Some of the currently validated systems in the United States are:-
    The Hospital for Special Surgery Score (HSS); the Simple Shoulder Test (SST); the UCLA Scale etc.
    When results from shoulder surgery are reported there are currently great difficulties in comparing these results when different scoring systems are used – it is particularly difficult to compare the European scored results with the American scored results.
    This study will investigate a comparison of these different scoring systems used in the same patients and will aim to identify a “correction factor” which will allow these different scores to be compared in published studies.
    The study will develop the skills and knowledge of the student in understanding shoulder scoring systems, how they are used in clinical practice and the statistical background to comparing one scoring system with another.
    The outcome from this study will result in an improved ability of surgeons to compare European and American outcomes following shoulder surgery and to compare and contrast the results of surgical treatment from around the world.

  • REC name

    East Midlands - Nottingham 1 Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    15/EM/0011

  • Date of REC Opinion

    12 Mar 2015

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion