CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04633083ROMUpdated Sep 26, 2023

Range-of-motion Analysis of Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty

An interventional study of Data collection in Shoulder Impingement, sponsored by Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven. Completed at 1 site in Belgium. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-09-26.

Sponsored by Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
18
Allocation
Non-randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Limited range-of-motion (ROM) is a common problem after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The occurrence and magnitude depend on both surgical and patient-related factors. The most important surgical factor is the occurrence of impingement, which implicates collision between the humeral implant or bone and the scapula, limiting further motion. Patient-related factors such as scapula geometry and muscle function and activation also play an important role. Surgeons have to account for these factors when planning and implanting a RSA. Software models can support the surgeon during preoperative planning by using imaging data to simulate the ROM of a patient's shoulder after RSA. These software models allow for adaptation of the implant position during preoperative planning and, by this optimize the postoperative ROM. However, the models currently developed are limited in terms of ROM simulation and the factors the models take into account.

Read the detailed description

The impingement-free ROM in a RSA patient is defined as the rotational area the humeral liner can move through without colliding against the scapula or dislocating the joint. In a previous study, a new software model was developed that uses imaging data to compute and quantify the impingement-free ROM of a patient according to clinically relevant motions. Before this model can be used in clinical practice, a validation of the model's accuracy in predicting real RSA patient outcomes is required. Therefore, the first objective is to verify the model's ability to predict the ROM of the glenohumeral joint in real RSA patients. The investigators will investigate and quantify the ROM and joint angles of RSA patients with and without impingement with the help of EOS imaging and video motion analysis. The investigators can then compare model outputs with measured patient outcomes. Additionally, the investigators will investigate how well our software model can predict impingement in patients with known postoperative impingement.

Currently, the software model uses a database of healthy shoulder kinematic motions to produce an objective ROM score for a RSA. However, it is not known if healthy shoulder kinematics are a suitable reference for quantifying and interpreting RSA kinematics. Glenohumeral motions of healthy subjects are already extensively described by Ludewig et al. Glenohumeral motions of RSA patients are not yet reported. Also, little is known about muscle activation patterns in RSA patients. The second objective is to describe muscle activation patterns and shoulder kinematics of RSA patients and compare our measured RSA kinematic motions to the healthy kinematic motion data currently used in the software model. Therefore, the investigators will perform instrumented 3D motion analysis in conjunction with electromyography measurements to incorporate muscle activation patterns into our RSA glenohumeral motion analysis. Our additional sub-objective is to compare muscle activation patterns between patients with and without limited ROM, with the goal of identifying differences between the two groups.

The third objective is to identify patient-related and implant related factors that influence the ROM after a reversed shoulder arthroplasty. Therefore, the investigators will investigate clinical factors that could have effect on the ROM after RSA. The different factors (sex, birth year, Body Mass Index, generic score EQ-5D-3L, Tampa Schaal voor kinesofobia) will be analyzed both across and within patients with and without limited ROM with the goal of identifying their relation to ROM. The most important implanted related factor will also be investigated and analyzed both across and within groups: implant position in terms of glenoid component version, inclination and location of center of rotation.

02

Conditions studied

  • Shoulder Impingement
03

In context

Shoulder Impingement Syndrome

304 studies on the registry are indexed under Shoulder Impingement Syndrome; 55 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 18 is below the median of 54 across 261 interventional studies indexed under Shoulder Impingement Syndrome.

Browse Shoulder Impingement Syndrome studies →

Lead sponsor

Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven is the lead sponsor of 928 studies on the registry; 261 are open to participants now.

Of its 5 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Adults with RSA operated in the University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium
  • Ability and willingness of patient to attend follow-up visit and complete patient questionnaires
  • Complete patient informed consent
  • Preoperative CT-scan available
  • Pain free RSA (VAS score ≤ 3) more than 1 year postoperative

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Only RSA patients with a functional RSA will be included, so patients with postoperative stiffness, pain, instability or pseudoparalysis will be excluded.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Diagnostic
Allocation
Non-randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
18 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Other
    Signs of impingement

    a. non- limited ROM i. Endorotation control until lumbosacral level ii. Scapular plane abduction above 150° b. limited ROM i. Endorotation control lower then lumbosacral level ii. Scapular plane abduction under 150° Intervention: clinical data, imaging data, movement analysis, EOS measurements, ROM simulation

    Other: Data collection

  • Other
    No Signs of impingement

    a. non- limited ROM i. Endorotation control until lumbar level ii. Scapular plane abduction above 150° b. limited ROM i. Endorotation control lower then lumbar level ii. Scapular plane abduction under 150° Intervention: clinical data, imaging data, movement analysis, EOS measurements, ROM simulation

    Other: Data collection

Interventions

  • OtherData collection

    Clinical Data: Registration of patient identity, sex and birth year, Body Mass Index, generic score EQ-5D-3L, Tampa Schaal voor kinesofobia and shoulder specific score like Constant Score, PROMS, ADLER, SST and postoperative ROM. Imaging Data: A preoperative and postoperative CT scan and 1-year postoperative radiograph (all three part of standard clinical practice) will be obtained. This data is used to extract the bone geometries and implant position. Movement Analysis: The subject should stand still followed by different motion tasks in the gait lab with collection of shoulder girdle kinematics and kinetics using a 14-camera VICON System. Stereo Radiographic EOS Measurements: Every subject included in the study will undergo a stereo radiographic EOS exam while quite standing with their arm in various positions (van Andel et al., 2008) . ROM simulation: With the developed ROM software, we will simulate the ROM of the 2 patient groups based on the available CT scan data.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Demographic data (Sex)

    Sex

    Time frame: 1-time assessment at a time of 1 or more years postoperatively

  2. Demographic data (Birth year)

    Birth year

    Time frame: 1-time assessment at a time of 1 or more years postoperatively

  3. Demographic data (Body Mass Index)

    Body Mass Index in kg/m2 (physiological parameter)

    Time frame: 1-time assessment at a time of 1 or more years postoperatively

  4. Demographic data (Range of motion)

    Range of motion in degrees (physiological parameter)

    Time frame: 1-time assessment at a time of 1 or more years postoperatively

  5. Imaging data

    Pre- and post-surgery CT scan

    Time frame: 1-time assessment at a time of 1 or more years postoperatively

  6. Movement analysis

    The subject should stand still followed by different motion tasks in the gait lab with collection of shoulder girdle kinematics and kinetics using a 14-camera VICON System

    Time frame: 1-time assessment at a time of 1 or more years postoperatively

  7. Stereo Radiographic EOS Measurements

    Every subject included in the study will undergo a stereo radiographic EOS exam while quite standing with their arm in various positions (van Andel et al., 2008)

    Time frame: 1-time assessment at a time of 1 or more years postoperatively

  8. ROM simulation

    Simulate the ROM of the 2 patient groups based on the available CT scan data

    Time frame: 1-time assessment at a time of 1 or more years postoperatively

  9. EQ-5D-3L questionnaire

    It is a questionnaire to measure health-related quality of life

    Time frame: 1-time assessment at a time of 1 or more years postoperatively

  10. Tampa scale for kinesiophobia (fear of movement)

    It is a questionnaire that gives an impression of the degree of pain-related fear in patients with low back pain (LBP) or fibromyalgia.

    Time frame: 1-time assessment at a time of 1 or more years postoperatively

  11. Constant Score

    These parameters define the level of pain and the ability to carry out the normal daily activities of the patient

    Time frame: 1-time assessment at a time of 1 or more years postoperatively

  12. ADLER (Activities of Daily Living [ADL] which require active External Rotation [ER])

    It measures the severity of the potential handicap

    Time frame: 1-time assessment at a time of 1 or more years postoperatively

  13. SST (Simple Shoulder Test)

    It is a measuring instrument that measures the functional limitations of the affected shoulder of patients with shoulder complaints

    Time frame: 1-time assessment at a time of 1 or more years postoperatively

07

Study locations

1 site
  • UZ Leuven, campus Pellenberg
    Pellenberg, 3212, Belgium
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 26, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04633083
Lead sponsor
Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Nov 18, 2020
Start date
Mar 20, 2019
Primary completion
Mar 8, 2023
Completion
Mar 8, 2023
Last update
Sep 26, 2023

Study contacts

Filip Verhaegen, MD
principal investigator · Medical Doctor, Principal Investigator

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion