The effect of rehabilitation time on functional recovery after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective We compared the effects of early and delayed rehabilitation on the function of patients after rotator cuff repair by meta-analysis to find effective interventions to promote the recovery of shoulder function. Methods This meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023466122). We manually searched the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Library, Pubmed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), the China VIP Database (VIP), and the Wanfang Database to evaluate the effect of early and delayed rehabilitation after arthroscopic shoulder cuff surgery on the recovery of shoulder joint function. Review Manager 5.3 software was used to analyze the extracted data. Then, the PEDro scale was employed to appraise the methodological quality of the included research. Results This research comprised nine RCTs and 830 patients with rotator cuff injuries. According to the findings of the meta-analysis, there was no discernible difference between the early rehabilitation group and the delayed rehabilitation group at six and twelve months after the surgery in terms of the VAS score, SST score, follow-up rotator cuff healing rate, and the rotator cuff retear rate at the final follow-up. There was no difference in the ASES score between the early and delayed rehabilitation groups six months after the operation. However, although the ASES score in the early rehabilitation group differed significantly from that in the delayed rehabilitation group twelve months after the operation, according to the analysis of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), the results have no clinical significance. Conclusions The improvement in shoulder function following arthroscopic rotator cuff surgery does not differ clinically between early and delayed rehabilitation. When implementing rehabilitation following rotator cuff repair, it is essential to consider the paradoxes surrounding shoulder range of motion and tendon anatomic healing. A program that allows for flexible progression based on the patient’s ability to meet predetermined clinical goals or criteria may be a better option.