Evaluating Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis: The Relative Impact of Patient Age, Activity Level, Symptoms, and Kellgren-Lawrence Grade on Treatment



1 University of Cincinnati Department of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA

2 Rothman Institute, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

3 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA

4 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, USA

5 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA

6 Department of Orthopaedics, Southern California Permanente Medical Group, Anaheim, California, USA

7 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan, USA

8 University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

9 Premier Care Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA

10 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA

11 Steadman Hawkins Clinic of the Carolinas, Greenville Health System, Greenville, South Carolina, USA

12 Premier Orthopaedics, Havertown, Pennsylvania, USA

13 Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA

14 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Warren-Alpert School of Medicine at Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island

15 Orthopaedic Associates of Dallas, Dallas, Texas, USA

16 Cincinnati Sports Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA

17 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri, USA

18 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA

19 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Montefiore, New York, New York, USA


Background: It is not always clear how to treat glenohumeral osteoarthritis, particularly in young patients. The goals of
this study were to 1) quantify how patient age, activity level, symptoms, and radiographic findings impact the decisionmaking
of shoulder specialists and 2) evaluate the observer reliability of the Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grading system for
primary osteoarthritis of the shoulder.
Methods: Twenty-six shoulder surgeons were each sent 54 simulated patient cases. Each patient had a different
combination of age, symptoms, activity level, and radiographs. Responders graded the radiographs and chose a
treatment (non-operative, arthroscopy, hemiarthroplasty, or total shoulder arthroplasty). Spearman correlations and
chi square tests were used to assess the relationship between factors and treatments. Sub-analysis was performed
on surgical cases. An intra-class correlation (ICC) was used to assess observer agreement.
Results: The significant correlations (P<0.01) were: symptoms [0.46], KL grade [0.44], and age [0.11]. In the subanalysis
of operative cases, the significant correlations were: KL grade [0.64], age [0.39], and activity level [-0.10].
The chi square analysis was significant (P<0.01) for all factors, but the practical significance of activity level was
minimal. The ICCs were [inter](intra): KL [0.79] (0.84), patient management [0.54].
Conclusion: When evaluating glenohumeral osteoarthritis, patient symptoms and KL grade are the factors most
strongly associated with treatment. In operative cases, the factors most strongly associated with the choice of operation
were the patient’s KL grade and age. Additionally, the KL classification demonstrated excellent observer reliability.
However, there was only moderate agreement among shoulder specialists regarding treatment, indicating that this
remains a controversial topic.
Level of evidence: III


Main Subjects

1. Lawrence RC, Helmick CG, Arnett FC, Deyo RA,
Felson DT, Giannini EH, et al. Estimates of the
prevalence of arthritis and selected musculoskeletal
disorders in the United States. Arthritis Rheum.
1998; 41(5):778-99.
2. Yelin E, Weinstein S, King T. The burden of
musculoskeletal diseases in the United States. Semin
Arthritis Rheum. 2016; 46(3):259-60.
3. Somerson JS, Neradilek MB, Service BC, Hsu JE,
Russ SM, Matsen FA. Clinical and radiographic
outcomes of the ream-and-run procedure for primary
glenohumeral arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;

4. Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Rowland CM. Neer
hemiarthroplasty and neer total shoulder arthroplasty
in patients fifty years old or less. Long-term results. J
Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998; 80(4):464-73.
5. Li X, Eichinger JK, Higgins LD. Management of failed
metal-backed glenoid component in patients with
bilateral total shoulder arthroplasty. Int J Shoulder
Surg. 2013; 7(4):143-8.
6. Vuillermin CB, Trump ME, Barwood SA, Hoy GA.
Catastrophic failure of a low profile metal-backed
glenoid component after total shoulder arthroplasty.
Int J Shoulder Surg. 2015; 9(4):121-7.
7. Walch G, Boulahia A, Boileau P, Kempf JF. Primary 

glenohumeral osteoarthritis: clinical and radiographic
classification. The Aequalis Group. Acta Orthop Belg.
1998; 64(Suppl 2):46-52.

8. Ogilvie-Harris DJ, Wiley AM. Arthroscopic surgery of
the shoulder. A general appraisal. J Bone Joint Surg Br.
1986; 68(2):201-7.
9. Van Thiel GS, Sheehan S, Frank RM, Slabaugh M,
Cole BJ, Nicholson GP, et al. Retrospective analysis
of arthroscopic management of glenohumeral
degenerative disease. Arthroscopy. 2010; 26(11):
10. Holzer N, Salvo D, Marijnissen AC, Vincken KL,
Ahmad AC, Serra E, et al. Radiographic evaluation
of posttraumatic osteoarthritis of the ankle: the
Kellgren-Lawrence scale is reliable and correlates
with clinical symptoms. Osteoarthritis Cartilage.
2015; 23(3):363-9.
11. Riddle DL, Jiranek WA. Knee osteoarthritis
radiographic progression and associations with pain
and function prior to knee arthroplasty: a multicenter
comparative cohort study. Osteoarthritis Cartilage.
2015; 23(3):391-6.
12. Momenzadeh OR, Gerami MH, Sefidbakht S, Dehghani
S. Assessment of correlation between MRI and
arthroscopic pathologic findings in the shoulder joint.
Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2015; 3(4):286-90.
13. Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiological assessment of
osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1957; 16(4):494-
14. Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 1992;
15. Fleiss JL, Cohen J. The equivalence of weighted kappa
and the intraclass correlation coefficient as measures
of reliability. Educ Psychol Meas. 1973; 33(3):613-9.
16. Norman GR, Streiner DL. Biostatistics: the bare
essentials. 3rd ed. Shelton: People’s Medical
Publication; 2008. P. 393.
17. Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb
for evaluating normed and standardized assessment
instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess. 1994;
18. Team RC. R: a language and environment for
statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation
for Statistical Computing; 2017.
19. Studio R. R studio: integrated development
environment for R. Boston: RStudio Inc; 2012.
20. Gamer M, Lemon J, Singh IF. Various coefficients of
interrater reliabiltiy and agreement. New York: R
Package Version; 2012.
21. Testing and plotting procedures for biostatistics.
RVAideMemoire. Available at: URL: https://CRAN.Rproject.
org/package=RVAideMemoire; 2017.
22. Basic functions for power analysis. PWR. Available
at: URL: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=pwr;
23. Rockwood CA. The shoulder. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA:
Saunders/Elsevier; 2009. P. 2.
24. Barlow JD, Abboud J. Surgical options for the young
patient with glenohumeral arthritis. Int J Shoulder
Surg. 2016; 10(1):28-36.
25. Bhatia S, Van Thiel GS, Gupta D, Ghodadra N, Cole
BJ, Bach BR, et al. Comparison of glenohumeral
contact pressures and contact areas after glenoid
reconstruction with latarjet or distal tibial
osteochondral allografts. Am J Sports Med. 2013;
26. Liem D, Kasten P. Management of glenohumeral
osteoarthritis in the young patient: ask the experts. J
Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012; 21(4):561-6.
27. Sayegh ET, Mascarenhas R, Chalmers PN, Cole BJ,
Romeo AA, Verma NN. Surgical treatment options
for glenohumeral arthritis in young patients: a
systematic review and meta-analysis. Arthroscopy.
2015; 31(6):1156-66.e8.
28. Johnson MH, Paxton ES, Green A. Shoulder arthroplasty
options in young (<50 years old) patients: review
of current concepts. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015;
29. Sinha I, Lee M, Cobiella C. Management of osteoarthritis
of the glenohumeral joint. Br J Hosp Med Lond Engl.
2008; 69(5):264-8.
30. Weinstein DM, Bucchieri JS, Pollock RG, Flatow EL,
Bigliani LU. Arthroscopic debridement of the shoulder
for osteoarthritis. Arthroscopy. 2000; 16(5):471-6.
31. Lubowitz JH. Editorial commentary: shoulder
arthroscopy, shoulder hemiarthroplasty, and
total shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral
osteoarthritis. Arthroscopy. 2015; 31(6):1167-8.
32. Mitchell JJ, Warner BT, Horan MP, Raynor MB, Menge
TJ, Greenspoon JA, et al. Comprehensive arthroscopic
management of glenohumeral osteoarthritis:
preoperative factors predictive of treatment failure.
Am J Sports Med. 2017; 45(4):794-802.
33. Bryant D, Litchfield R, Sandow M, Gartsman GM,
Guyatt G, Kirkley A. A comparison of pain, strength,
range of motion, and functional outcomes after
hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty
in patients with osteoarthritis of the shoulder. A
systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint
Surg Am. 2005; 87(9):1947-56.
34. Radnay CS, Setter KJ, Chambers L, Levine WN, Bigliani
LU, Ahmad CS. Total shoulder replacement compared
with humeral head replacement for the treatment of
primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis: a systematic
review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007; 16(4):396-402.
35. Carroll RM, Izquierdo R, Vazquez M, Blaine TA,
Levine WN, Bigliani LU. Conversion of painful
hemiarthroplasty to total shoulder arthroplasty:
long-term results. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2004;
36. Sperling JW, Cofield RH. Revision total shoulder
arthroplasty for the treatment of glenoid arthrosis. J
Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998; 80(6):860-7.
37. Garcia GH, Liu JN, Sinatro A, Wu HH, Dines JS, Warren
RF, et al. High satisfaction and return to sports after
total shoulder arthroplasty in patients aged 55 years
and younger. Am J Sports Med. 2017; 45(7):1664-9.
38. Getz CL, Kearns KA, Padegimas EM, Johnston
PS, Lazarus MD, Williams GR. Survivorship of
hemiarthroplasty with concentric glenoid reaming
for glenohumeral arthritis in young, active patients
with a biconcave glenoid. J Am Acad Orthop Surg.2017; 25(10):715-23.

39. Kusnezov N, Dunn JC, Parada SA, Kilcoyne K,
Waterman BR. Clinical outcomes of anatomical total
shoulder arthroplasty in a young, active population.
Am J Orthop. 2016; 45(5):E273-82.
40. Roberson TA, Bentley JC, Griscom JT, Kissenberth MJ,
Tolan SJ, Hawkins RJ, et al. Outcomes of total shoulder
arthroplasty in patients younger than 65 years: a
systematic review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2017;
41. Sowa B, Bochenek M, Bülhoff M, Zeifang F, Loew
M, Bruckner T, et al. The medium- and long-term
outcome of total shoulder arthroplasty for primary
glenohumeral osteoarthritis in middle-aged patients.
Bone Jt J. 2017; 99-B(7):939-43.
42. Sowa B, Thierjung H, Bülhoff M, Loew M, Zeifang F,
Bruckner T, et al. Functional results of hemi- and
total shoulder arthroplasty according to diagnosis
and patient age at surgery. Acta Orthop. 2017;
43. Bhat SB, Lazarus M, Getz C, Williams GR, Namdari
S. Economic decision model suggests total shoulder
arthroplasty is superior to hemiarthroplasty in
young patients with end-stage shoulder arthritis. Clin
Orthop. 2016; 474(11):2482-92.
44. Denard PJ, Wirth MA, Orfaly RM. Management of
glenohumeral arthritis in the young adult. J Bone Joint
Surg Am. 2011; 93(9):885-92.
45. Cil A, Veillette CJ, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Sperling JW,
Schleck CD, Cofield RH. Survivorship of the humeral
component in shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder
Elbow Surg. 2010; 19(1):143-50.
46. Samilson RL, Prieto V. Dislocation arthropathy of the
shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1983; 65(4):456-60.
47. Allain J, Goutallier D, Glorion C. Long-term results of
the Latarjet procedure for the treatment of anterior
instability of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998;
48. Gerber C. Latissimus dorsi transfer for the treatment
of irreparable tears of the rotator cuff. Clin Orthop
Relat Res. 1992; 275(1):152-60.
49. Guyette TM, Bae H, Warren RF, Craig E, Wickiewicz TL.
Results of arthroscopic subacromial decompression
in patients with subacromial impingement and
glenohumeral degenerative joint disease. J Shoulder
Elbow Surg. 2002; 11(4):299-304.
50. Cho HJ, Morey V, Kang JY, Kim KW, Kim TK. Prevalence
and risk factors of spine, shoulder, hand, hip, and
knee osteoarthritis in community-dwelling Koreans
older than age 65 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;
51. Elsharkawi M, Cakir B, Reichel H, Kappe T. Reliability of
radiologic glenohumeral osteoarthritis classifications.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013; 22(8):1063-7.
52. Braun HJ, Gold GE. Diagnosis of osteoarthritis:
imaging. Bone. 2012; 51(2):278-88.
53. Kohn MD, Sassoon AA, Fernando ND. Classifications
in brief: Kellgren-Lawrence classification of
osteoarthritis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;
54. Gupta KB, Duryea J, Weissman BN. Radiographic
evaluation of osteoarthritis. Radiol Clin North Am.
2004; 42(1):11-41.
55. Millett PJ, Horan MP, Pennock AT, Rios D.
Comprehensive Arthroscopic Management (CAM)
procedure: clinical results of a joint-preserving
arthroscopic treatment for young, active patients
with advanced shoulder osteoarthritis. Arthroscopy.
2013; 29(3):440-8.
56. Cameron BD, Galatz LM, Ramsey ML, Williams GR,
Iannotti JP. Non-prosthetic management of grade IV
osteochondral lesions of the glenohumeral joint. J
Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002; 11(1):25-32.
57. Kerr BJ, McCarty EC. Outcome of arthroscopic
débridement is worse for patients with glenohumeral
arthritis of both sides of the joint. Clin Orthop Relat
Res. 2008; 466(3):634-8.