Functional outcomes of traumatic and non-traumatic rotator cuff tears after arthroscopic repair

Table 1 Sex distribution of patients with traumatic vs non-traumatic rotator cuff tears n (%)

Trauma	No	Yes	P-value
Female	38 (74.5)	18 (51.4)	0.027
Male	13 (25.5)	17 (48.6)

Table 2 Average ages of patients with traumatic vs non-traumatic rotator cuff tears

Age	Trauma
	No	Yes
Mean	59	59.5
Median	60	62
Standard deviation	8.4	9.7
Coefficient of variation	14%	16%
Minimum	40	42
Maximum	75	76
Patients	51	35
Confidence interval	2.3	3.2
P-value	0.799

Table 3 Modified University of California, Los Angeles scores of patients with traumatic vs non-traumatic rotator cuff tears

UCLA	Trauma
	No	Yes
Mean	33.7	32.8
Median	35	35
Standard deviation	3.9	4.5
Coefficient of variation	12%	14%
Minimum	12	17
Maximum	35	35
Patients	51	35
Confidence interval	1.1	1.5
P-value	0.337

UCLA: University of California, Los Angeles.

Table 4 Strength ratios between unaffected-affected shoulders of patients with traumatic vs non-traumatic rotator cuff tears

Unaffected-affected	Trauma
	No	Yes
Mean	1.21	1.39
Median	1	1
Standard deviation	1.42	1.49
Coefficient of variation	117%	107%
Minimum	-1.5	-0.5
Maximum	6	4.5
Patients	51	35
Confidence interval	0.39	0.49
P-value	0.576

Table 5 Affected/unaffected shoulder strength ratio between patients with traumatic and non-traumatic rotator cuff tears

Strength ratio	Trauma
	No	Yes
Mean	0.805	0.729
Median	0.833	0.857
Standard deviation	0.257	0.32
Coefficient of variation	32%	44%
Minimum	0.143	0
Maximum	1.6	1.083
Patients	51	35
Confidence interval	0.071	0.106
P-value	0.224

Table 6 Affected vs unaffected shoulder strength

Strength	Affected side	Unaffected side
Mean	4.76	6.04
Median	5	6
Standard deviation	2.38	2.06
Coefficient of variation	50%	34%
Minimum	0	1
Maximum	11.5	12.5
Patients	86	86
Confidence interval	0.5	0.44
P-value	< 0.001