Punch vs. Drill Tunnel Use for Anchor Tunnel Creation and Correlation With Post-operative Pain (Punch/Drill)

April 7, 2025 updated by: Matt Smith
To determine if different techniques used in the creation of suture anchor socket creation can influence post-op pain following rotator cuff repair.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

43

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Missouri
      • Columbia, Missouri, United States, 65212
        • University of Missouri

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 80 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

a. Patient's aged 18-80 years old with diagnosis of rotator cuff tear having failed non-operative management and being indicated for surgical intervention with use of suture anchors.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Glenohumeral arthrosis
  2. Previous shoulder surgery
  3. Psychiatric diseasesMRI
  4. Rheumatologic diseases
  5. Fibromyalgia
  6. Spine diseases

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Bone socket formation with a punch
suture anchor socket creation with punch
suture anchor socket creation with punch
Active Comparator: Bone socket formation with a drill
suture anchor socket creation with drill
suture anchor socket creation with drill

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) - Physical Function Short Form
Time Frame: Preop, 2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 3 Months, 6 Months
The PROMIS Physical Function Short Form uses T-scores (Mean = 50, SD = 10), where higher scores indicate better physical function. Responses use a Likert scale: 1 = "Unable to do," 2 = "With much difficulty," 3 = "With some difficulty," 4 = "With a little difficulty," 5 = "Without any difficulty." Raw scores are summed and converted to T-scores. 50 = average function, 60 = 1 SD above (better), 40 = 1 SD below (worse).
Preop, 2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 3 Months, 6 Months
Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE)
Time Frame: Preop, 2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 3 Months, 6 Months
The Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) is a simple, one-question patient-reported outcome measure. A SANE score requires the patient to rate their knee function on a scale of 0 to 100% with 100% being normal.
Preop, 2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 3 Months, 6 Months
Visual Analogue Scale
Time Frame: Preop, 2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 3 Months, 6 Months
Patient Reported Outcome Measure - pain Scale: 0-10. 0 being no pain and 10 being unbearable pain
Preop, 2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 3 Months, 6 Months
PROMIS - Pain Interference
Time Frame: Preop, 2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 3 Months, 6 Months
The PROMIS Pain Interference Short Form uses T-scores (Mean = 50, SD = 10), where higher scores indicate greater pain interference. Responses use a Likert scale: 1 = "Not at all," 2 = "A little bit," 3 = "Somewhat," 4 = "Quite a bit," 5 = "Very much." Raw scores are summed and converted to T-scores. 50 = average pain interference, 60 = 1 SD above (worse), 40 = 1 SD below (better).
Preop, 2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 3 Months, 6 Months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of the Shoulder
Time Frame: 2 weeks
MRI of the shoulder of the first 5 patients in each group will be obtained at 2 weeks post-op for evaluation of bone marrow lesion in the proximal humerus. Bone marrow lesion size measured in mm2 on a calibrated MR image from 0 (no lesion, better) to 180 (large lesion, worse)
2 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Matthew J Smith, University of Missouri Health System, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

April 1, 2020

Primary Completion (Actual)

June 15, 2023

Study Completion (Actual)

July 1, 2023

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 20, 2020

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 27, 2020

First Posted (Actual)

February 28, 2020

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

April 8, 2025

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 7, 2025

Last Verified

April 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Rotator Cuff Tears

Clinical Trials on suture anchor socket creation with punch

Subscribe