Hakan TIRIN, Murat GULCEK
Eskisehir Medical Journal - 2026;7(3):260-266
Introduction: Given the absence of consensus on the most appropriate outcome measure, this study was designed to comparatively evaluate the predictive capacity of established scoring systems in assessing functional recovery following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Methods: Medical records of patients who received unilateral rotator cuff repair at a tertiary institution between 2011 and 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Following the application of predefined eligibility criteria, 64 patients were retained for analysis and stratified by tear size into Group 1 (tears >3 cm; n=33) and Group 2 (tears <3 cm; n=31). Three validated outcome instruments (the Constant-Murley score, the University of California-Los Angeles shoulder score and Visual Analogue Scale) were administered at baseline and at 6-, 12-, and 24-month postoperative intervals. Baseline demographic characteristics, including preoperative age, sex, rotator cuff tear size, dominant extremity, and affected shoulder, were also recorded. Results: Baseline demographic characteristics were comparable between cohorts (p > 0.05). Constant-Murley scores demonstrated significant intergroup differences at all assessment intervals (p < 0.05), with Group II yielding superior values throughout. University of California-Los Angeles shoulder scores were comparable between groups at all postoperative time points (p > 0.05), though a significant preoperative disparity favoring Group II was identified (p < 0.05). Visual Analogue Scale pain scores showed no significant intergroup differences at any time point (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Among the instruments evaluated, the Constant-Murley score demonstrated the greatest discriminative capacity for postoperative functional assessment. These findings may inform both clinical practice and future prospective studies seeking to standardize outcome measurement in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.
