Return to work following shoulder arthroplasty: A systematic review

Table 1 Study characteristics

Ref.	Design	No. of groups	Level of evidence	Mean follow-up (range), yr	MINORS score
Bülhoff et al[10], 2015	Retrospective	1	IV	6.2 (2.6-12.6)	7/16
Jawa et al[56], 2015	Retrospective	2	III	3.9 (2.0-5.6)	17/24
Morris et al[55], 2015	Retrospective	2	III	3.5 (2-8)	20/24
Garcia et al[28], 2016	Retrospective	1	IV	2.6 (1-4.7)	10/16
Garcia et al[36], 2016	Retrospective	1	IV	5.1 (1-7.5)	10/16
Hurwit et al[11], 2017	Retrospective	2	III	HHA: 5.3 (1.1-7.5); rTSA1: 2.7 (1.0-4.9)	16/24
Liu et al[12], 2018	Retrospective	1	IV	5.4 (2.5-8.6)	10/16
Kurowicki et al[41], 2018	Retrospective	2	III	2.4 (0.5-7.6)	17/24
Gowd et al[48], 2019	Retrospective	2	III	Hemi RR: 5.7 (SD ± 2.0); aTSA: 5.8 (SD ± 2.2)	17/24
Cvetanovich et al[21], 2020	Retrospective	1	IV	3.4 (1.9-5.0)	9/16
Jayasekara et al[22], 20202	Retrospective	3	IV	NR	NA
Liu et al[49], 2020	Retrospective	2	III	HHA: 5.2 (2.0-7.5); aTSA: 5.18 (2.0-7.49)	16/24

¹Represents duplicate data from Garcia et al[28]; not included in meta-analysis.

²Numbers are relevant to groups who underwent total shoulder arthroplasty, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, and hemiarthroplasty.

MINORS: Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies; HHA: Humeral hemiarthroplasty; rTSA: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty; NR: Not reported; NA: Not available; Hemi RR: Hemiarthroplasty with ream-and-run resurfacing; aTSA: Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.