Morrey, Mark E

Aims Reliable assessment of joint stiffness is essential for studying arthrofibrosis in preclinical animal models. This study presents a new dedicated biomechanics device for measuring knee stiffness in mouse, rat, and rabbit models of arthrofibrosis, with the aim of validating its performance and comparing it to a previously validated device. Methods The new system integrates a torque load cell, stepper motor, and absolute encoder in a through-hole, unified configuration for precise continuous torque-angle measurement, with custom limb brackets ensuring species-specific alignment at the joint’s centre of rotation. To validate this device and compare it to a previously validated device, arthrofibrosis was induced using established models of extra-articular immobilization in mice and intra-articular violation with immobilization in rats and rabbits, followed by defined remobilization periods. Torque-angle curves were recorded ex vivo across species-specific torque ranges, and measurement variability between the new and a previous validated device was statistically compared using Brown-Forsythe’s test. Results The onset of hyperextension in contralateral limbs occurred at mean angles of 152.4° (mice), 154.4° (rats), and 152.8° (rabbits), and at maximum torque, mean flexion angles were 79.2°, 87.3°, and 140.5°, respectively. No significant differences in measurement variability were observed between devices across all species. Conclusion These findings demonstrate that our new device provides reproducible torque-angle data while maintaining the statistical robustness of the previous device and offering improved mechanical design and operational standardization. By enabling standardized, cross-species joint stiffness quantification, this platform improves cross-study comparability and strengthens the translational reliability of preclinical arthrofibrosis research. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2026;15(6):716–725.

Abstract Purpose The Optimizing Performance Through Intrinsic Motivation and Attention for Learning (OPTIMAL) theory postulates that directing attention to the intended movement effect or outcome (external focus) is more effective than directing attention to the internal body motion or body part (internal focus). This study compared external versus internal focus of attention as novice students learned ultrasound-guided peripheral cannulation. The authors hypothesized that conditions promoting an external (vs internal) focus of attention would result in better performance on immediate and delayed (retention) testing. Method The authors conducted a randomized, experimental study from October 2022 to February 2023 comparing external and internal focus using ultrasound-guided peripheral venous cannulation followed by practice using an ultrasound training block. Undergraduate health science students performed 4 practice trials with instructions to focus on the needle tip (external focus) or their hands (internal focus), followed by immediate and delayed (retention) assessment 2 weeks later. The primary outcome was time to successful cannulation. Results were compared using Kaplan-Meier curves and parametric survival analysis regression (accelerated failure time) models. Results Seventy participants completed the immediate assessment. The external focus group completed successful cannulation a mean of 2.33 times faster (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.47–3.67; P < .001) than those in the internal focus group (median time, 12.0 vs 29.5 seconds). Results also favored the external focus group during practice, with the external focus group successfully completing the task a mean of 1.83 times faster (95% CI, 1.04–3.21; P = .04) than the internal focus group. In the retention assessment, the external focus group successfully completed the task a mean of 2.37 times faster (95% CI, 1.19–4.74; P = .02) than the internal focus group. Conclusions External focus of attention compared with internal focus of attention improves medical motor skill learning in novice learners.

Background: Traditionally, the reconstruction of severe distal humeral bone loss at the time of revision total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) has used allograft-prosthetic composites (APCs) stabilized with cerclage wires or cables. We have migrated to plate fixation when revision TEA using a humeral APC is performed. This study shows the outcomes of patients treated with a humeral APC with plate fixation during revision TEA. Methods: Between 2009 and 2019, 41 humeral APCs with plate fixation of distal humeral allograft to the native humerus were performed in the setting of revision TEA. There were 12 male patients (29%) and 29 female patients (71%), with a mean age of 63 years (range, 41 to 87 years). The mean allograft length was 12 cm. All elbows had a minimum follow-up of 2 years (mean follow-up, 3.3 years). Patients were evaluated for visual analog scale pain scores, range of motion, the ability to perform select activities of daily living, and the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS). Outcomes including reoperations, complications, and revisions were noted. The most recent radiographs were evaluated for union at the allograft-host interface, failure of the plate-and-screw construct, or component loosening. Results: The mean postoperative flexion was 124° (range, 60° to 150°) and the mean postoperative extension was 26° (range, 0° to 90°); the mean arc of motion was 99° (range, 30° to 150°). The mean MEPS was 58 points (range, 10 to 100 points). Two surgical procedures were complicated by neurologic deficits. The overall reoperation rate was 14 (34%) of 41. Of the 33 patients with complete radiographic follow-up, 12 (36%) had evidence of nonunion at the allograft-host interface with humeral component loosening, 1 (3%) had evidence of partial union, and 1 (3%) had ulnar stem loosening. Conclusions: Revision TEA with a humeral APC using compression plating was successful in approximately two-thirds of the elbows. Further refinement of surgical techniques is needed to improve union rates in these complex cases. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Glenoid baseplate malpositioning during reverse total shoulder arthroplasty can contribute to perimeter impingement, dislocation, and loosening. Despite advances in preoperative planning, conventional instrumentation may lead to considerable inaccuracy in implant positioning unless patient-specific guides are used. Optical navigation has the potential to improve accuracy and precision when implanting a reverse shoulder arthroplasty baseplate. This systematic review aimed to analyze the most recent evidence on the accuracy and precision of glenoid baseplate positioning using intraoperative navigation and its potential impact on component selection and surgical time. Methods: We conducted a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. The PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE databases were queried in July 2022 to identify all studies that compared navigation vs. conventional instrumentation for reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Data of deviation from the planned baseplate version and inclination, the use of standard or augmented glenoid components, and surgical time were extracted. Quantitative analysis from the included publications was performed using the inverse-variance approach and Mantel-Haenszel method. Results: Of the 2,048 records identified in the initial query, only 10 articles met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, comprising 667 shoulders that underwent reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The pooled mean difference (MD) of the deviation from the planned baseplate position for the clinical studies was −0.44 (95% confidence interval [CI], −3.26; p = 0.76; I 2 = 36%) for version and −8.75 (95% CI, −16.83 to −0.68; p = 0.02; I 2 = 83%) for inclination, both in favor of navigation. The odds ratio of selecting an augmented glenoid component after preoperative planning and navigation-assisted surgery was 8.09 (95% CI, 3.82-17.14; p < 0.00001; I 2 = 60%). The average surgical time was 12 minutes longer in the navigation group (MD 12.46, 95% CI, 5.20-19.72; p = 0.0008; I 2 = 71%). Conclusions: Preoperative planning integrated with computer-assisted navigation surgery seems to increase the accuracy and precision of glenoid baseplate inclination compared with the preoperatively planned placement during reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The surgical time and proportion of augmented glenoid components significantly increase when using navigation. However, the clinical impact of these findings on improving prosthesis longevity, complications, and patient functional outcomes is still unknown. Level of Evidence: Level III , systematic review and meta-analysis. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Abstract Despite the development of various therapeutic options, surgical management of irreparable rotator cuff tears (IRCTs) remains controversial. Recently, implantation of a biodegradable subacromial balloon spacer (InSpace, Stryker Corporation; Kalamazoo, MI) has gained considerable interest for the treatment of certain IRCTs. The reported outcome of balloon implantation has not been consistent, likely due to differing indications and technical approaches. The purpose of this article is to present a reproducible arthroscopic technique for implantation of a subacromial balloon and to review the literature published to date, regarding the efficacy and outcomes of this procedure. Technique Video video See video under supplementary data.

Purpose To analyze the clinical outcomes of lower trapezius transfer (LTT) for patients with functionally irreparable rotator cuff tears (FIRCT) and summarize the available literature regarding complications and reoperations. Methods After registration in the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO [CRD42022359277]), a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was performed. Inclusion criteria were English, full‐length, peer‐reviewed publications with a level of evidence IV or higher reporting on clinical outcomes of LTT for FIRCT. Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus via Elsevier databases were searched. Clinical data, complications and revisions were systematically recorded. Results Seven studies with 159 patients were identified. The mean age range was 52 to 63 years, 70.4% of the patients included were male, and the mean follow‐up time ranged between 14 and 47 months. At final follow‐up, LTT lead to improvements in range of motion, with reported forward elevation (FE) and external rotation (ER) mean gains of 10° to 66° and 11° to 63°, respectively. ER lag was present before surgery in 78 patients and was reversed after LTT in all shoulders. Patient‐reported outcomes were improved at final follow‐up, including the American Shoulder and Elbow Society score, Shoulder Subjective Value and Visual Analogue Scale. The overall complication rate was 17.6%, and the most reported complication was posterior harvest site seroma/hematoma (6.3%). The most common reoperation was conversion to reverse shoulder arthroplasty (5%) with an overall reoperation rate of 7.5%. Conclusions Lower trapezius transfer improves clinical outcomes in patients with irreparable rotator cuff tears with a rate of complications and reoperations comparable to other surgical alternatives in this group of patients. Increases in forward flexion and ER are to be expected, as well as a reversal of ER lag sign when present before surgery. Level of Evidence Level IV, systematic review of Level III‐IV studies.

Purpose To evaluate the outcomes of arthroscopic superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) and arthroscopy‐assisted lower trapezius tendon transfer (LTT) for posterosuperior irreparable rotator cuff tears (IRCTs). Methods Over an almost 6‐year period (October 2015 to March 2021), all patients who underwent IRCT surgery with a minimum 12‐month follow‐up period were identified. For patients with a substantial active external rotation (ER) deficit or lag sign, LTT was preferentially selected. Patient‐reported outcome scores included the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, strength score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) score. Results We included 32 SCR patients and 72 LTT patients. Preoperatively, LTT patients had more advanced teres minor fatty infiltration (0.3 vs 1.1, P = .009), a higher global fatty infiltration index (1.5 vs 1.9, P = .035), and a higher presence of the ER lag sign (15.6% vs 48.6%, P < .001). At a mean follow‐up of 2.9 ± 1.3 years (range, 1.0‐6.3 years), no differences in patient‐reported outcome scores were observed. Postoperatively, SCR patients had a lower VAS score (0.3 vs 1.1, P = .017), higher forward elevation (FE) (156° vs 143°, P = .004), and higher FE strength (4.8 vs 4.5, P = .005) and showed greater improvements in the VAS score (6.8 vs 5.1, P = .009), FE (56° vs 31°, P = .004), and FE strength (1.0 vs 0.4, P < .001). LTT patients showed greater improvement in ER (17° vs 29°, P = .026). There was no statistically significant between‐cohort difference in complication rate (9.4% vs 12.5%, P = .645) or reoperation rate (3.1% vs 10%, P = .231). Conclusions With adequate selection criteria, both SCR and LTT provided improved clinical outcomes for posterosuperior IRCTs. Additionally, SCR led to better pain relief and restoration of FE whereas LTT provided more reliable improvement in ER. Level of Evidence Level III, treatment study with retrospective cohort comparison.

Purpose To (1) report the long‐term outcomes associated with both operative and nonoperative management of capitellar osteochondritis dissecans (OCD), (2) identify factors associated with failure of nonoperative management, and (3) determine whether delay in surgery affects final outcomes. Methods All patients who received a diagnosis of capitellar OCD from 1995‐2020 within a geographic cohort were included. Medical records, imaging studies, and operative reports were manually reviewed to record demographic data, treatment strategies, and outcomes. The cohort was divided into 3 groups: (1) nonoperative management, (2) early surgery, and (3) delayed surgery. Delayed surgery (surgery ≥6 months after symptom onset) was considered failure of nonoperative management. Results Fifty elbows with a mean follow‐up period of 10.5 years (median, 10.3 years; range, 1‐25 years) were studied. Of these, 7 (14%) were definitively treated nonoperatively, 16 (32%) underwent delayed surgery after at least 6 months of failed nonoperative treatment, and 27 (54%) underwent early surgical intervention. When compared with nonoperative management, surgical management resulted in superior Mayo Elbow Performance Index pain scores (40.1 vs 33, P = .04), fewer mechanical symptoms (9% vs 50%, P < .01), and better elbow flexion (141° vs 131°, P = .01) at long‐term follow‐up. Older patients trended toward increased failure of nonoperative management ( P = .06). The presence of an intra‐articular loose body predicted failure of nonoperative management ( P = .01; odds ratio, 13). Plain radiography and magnetic resonance imaging had poor sensitivities for identifying loose bodies (27% and 40%, respectively). Differences in outcomes after early versus delayed surgical management were not observed. Conclusions Nonoperative management of capitellar OCD failed 70% of the time. Elbows that did not undergo surgery had slightly more symptoms and decreased functional outcomes compared with those treated surgically. The greatest predictors of failure of nonoperative treatment were older age and presence of a loose body; however, an initial trial of nonoperative treatment did not adversely impact the success of future surgery. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Background: Continuous passive motion (CPM) has been used for decades, but we are not aware of any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which CPM has been compared with physical therapy (PT) for rehabilitation following release of elbow contracture. Methods: In this single-blinded, single-center RCT, we randomly assigned patients undergoing arthroscopic release of elbow contracture to a rehabilitation protocol involving either CPM or PT. The primary outcomes were the rate of recovery and the arc of elbow motion (range of motion) at 1 year. The rate of recovery was evaluated by measuring range of motion at 6 weeks and 3 months. The secondary outcomes included other range-of-motion-related outcomes, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), flexion strength and endurance, grip strength, and forearm circumference at multiple time points. Results: A total of 24 patients were assigned to receive CPM, and 27 were assigned to receive PT. At 1 year, CPM was superior to PT with regard to the range of motion, with an estimated treatment difference of 9° (95% confidence interval [CI], 3° to 16°; p = 0.007). Similarly, the use of CPM led to a greater range of motion at 6 weeks and 3 months than PT. The percentage of lost motion recovered at 1 year was higher in the CPM group (51%) than in the PT group (36%) (p = 0.01). The probability of restoring a functional range of motion at 1 year was 62% higher in the CPM group than in the PT group (risk ratio for functional range of motion, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.01 to 2.61; p = 0.04). PROM scores were similar in the 2 groups at all time points, except for a difference in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) elbow function subscale, in favor of CPM, at 6 weeks. The use of CPM decreased swelling and reduced the loss of flexion strength, flexion endurance, and grip strength on day 3, with no between-group differences thereafter. Conclusions: Among patients undergoing arthroscopic release of elbow contracture, those who received CPM obtained a faster recovery and a greater range of motion at 1 year, with a higher chance of restoration of functional elbow motion than those who underwent routine PT. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: When revision elbow arthroplasty is required in the presence of structural proximal ulnar bone loss and triceps insufficiency, structural ulnar bone-grafting and triceps reconstruction are both required to reconstruct the skeleton and to restore active extension. We have developed a technique utilizing a structural proximal ulnar allograft with its attached triceps as an allograft-prosthetic composite (APC) to provide reconstruction of the proximal ulnar bone and deficient extensor mechanism with the same allograft. Methods: Between 2010 and 2017, the senior author performed 10 revision elbow arthroplasties using a proximal ulnar allograft with its intact triceps tendon allograft. The allograft ulna was combined with an ulnar component in an APC fashion, whereas the remaining triceps was repaired to the triceps allograft. Indications for a revision surgical procedure included aseptic loosening in 4 elbows, periprosthetic ulnar fracture with component loosening in 2 elbows, and the second stage of a 2-stage reimplantation in 4 elbows. Two elbows also required humeral APCs due to associated structural humeral bone loss. Postoperatively, all elbows were immobilized in extension for 6 weeks. The mean follow-up time was 45 months (range, 24 to 76 months). Results: Revision elbow arthroplasty resulted in pain improvement in all elbows in a 10-point visual analog scale. The mean flexion-extension arc was 95°, the mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 76 points (range, 45 to 95 points), and the mean triceps strength score was 4. There were 6 reoperations: 3 for humeral loosening, 1 for deep infection, 1 for fracture of the ulnar allograft, and 1 for wound debridement and closure. For the 8 elbows with an intact ulnar reconstruction, no ulnar components were radiographically loose, and the ulnar graft was considered radiographically intact and healed in 8 elbows. Conclusions: Reconstruction of the proximal part of the ulna and triceps in failed elbow arthroplasties with structural ulnar bone loss can be effectively accomplished using a structural proximal ulnar allograft as an APC with the preserved triceps tendon for the extensor mechanism reconstruction, but the procedure is associated with an expected high reoperation rate, as is the case in complex revision elbow arthroplasty. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.