We report a randomised controlled trial to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic acromioplasty in the treatment of stage II shoulder impingement syndrome. A total of 140 patients were randomly divided into two treatment groups: supervised exercise programme (n = 70, exercise group) and arthroscopic acromioplasty followed by a similar exercise programme (n = 70, combined treatment group). The main outcome measure was self-reported pain on a visual analogue scale of 0 to 10 at 24 months, measured on the 134 patients (66 in the exercise group and 68 in the combined treatment group) for whom endpoint data were available. An intention-to-treat analysis disclosed an improvement in both groups but without statistically significant difference in outcome between the groups (p = 0.65). The combined treatment was considerably more costly. Arthroscopic acromioplasty provides no clinically important effects over a structured and supervised exercise programme alone in terms of subjective outcome or cost-effectiveness when measured at 24 months. Structured exercise treatment should be the basis for treatment of shoulder impingement syndrome, with operative treatment offered judiciously until its true merit is proven

Objectives. To report the five-year results of a randomised controlled trial examining the effectiveness of arthroscopic acromioplasty in the treatment of stage II shoulder impingement syndrome. Methods. A total of 140 patients were randomly divided into two groups: 1) supervised exercise programme (n = 70, exercise group); and 2) arthroscopic acromioplasty followed by a similar exercise programme (n = 70, combined treatment group). Results. The main outcome measure was self-reported pain as measured on a visual analogue scale. At the five-year assessment a total of 109 patients were examined (52 in the exercise group and 57 in the combined treatment group). There was a significant decrease in mean self-reported pain on the VAS between baseline and the five-year follow-up in both the exercise group (from 6.5 (1 to 10) to 2.2 (0 to 8); p < 0.001) and the combined treatment group (from 6.4 (2 to 10) to 1.9 (0 to 8); p < 0.001). The same trend was seen in the secondary outcome measures (disability, working ability, pain at night, Shoulder Disability Questionnaire and reported painful days). An intention-to-treat analysis showed statistically significant improvements in both groups at five years compared with baseline. Further, improvement continued between the two- and five-year timepoints. No statistically significant differences were found in the patient-centred primary and secondary parameters between the two treatment groups. Conclusions. Differences in the patient-centred primary and secondary parameters between the two treatment groups were not statistically significant, suggesting that acromioplasty is not cost-effective. Structured exercise treatment seems to be the treatment of choice for shoulder impingement syndrome

In a prospective randomised study we compared the results of arthroscopic subacromial bursectomy alone with debridement of the subacromial bursa followed by acromioplasty. A total of 57 patients with a mean age of 47 years (31 to 60) suffering from primary subacromial impingement without a rupture of the rotator cuff who had failed previous conservative treatment were entered into the trial. The type of acromion was classified according to Bigliani. Patients were assessed at follow-up using the Constant score, the simple shoulder test and visual analogue scores for pain and functional impairment. One patient was lost to follow-up.

At a mean follow-up of 2.5 years (1 to 5) both bursectomy and acromioplasty gave good clinical results. No statistically significant differences were found between the two treatments. The type of acromion and severity of symptoms had a greater influence on the clinical outcome than the type of treatment. As a result, we believe that primary subacromial impingement syndrome is largely an intrinsic degenerative condition rather than an extrinsic mechanical disorder.

In order to compare the outcome from surgical repair and physiotherapy, 103 patients with symptomatic small and medium-sized tears of the rotator cuff were randomly allocated to one of the two approaches. The primary outcome measure was the Constant score, and secondary outcome measures included the self-report section of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, the Short Form 36 Health Survey and subscores for shoulder movement, pain, strength and patient satisfaction. Scores were taken at baseline and after six and 12 months by a blinded assessor. Nine patients (18%) with insufficient benefit from physiotherapy after at least 15 treatment sessions underwent secondary surgical treatment.

Analysis of between-group differences showed better results for the surgery group on the Constant scale (difference 13.0 points, p − 0.002), on the American Shoulder and Elbow surgeons scale (difference 16.1 points, p < 0.0005), for pain-free abduction (difference 28.8°, p = 0.003) and for reduction in pain (difference on a visual analogue scale −1.7 cm, p < 0.0005).