Skip to main content

Table 3 Number of patients receiving single-tunnel vs. two-tunnel techniques, subdivided by augmentation type, with clinical outcome results based on modification of the UCLA rating scale

From: Comparison of single and two-tunnel techniques during open treatment of acromioclavicular joint disruption

UCLA rating scale

Single-tunnel (n = 11)

Two-tunnel (n = 10)*

With augment

Without augment^

ST-tightrope

ST-ST#

Excellent

1

1

1

2

Good

0

0

2

2

Fair

2

1

1

1

Poor

3

3

0

1

Total

6

5

4

6

N(%) with excellent or good

1 (17%)

1 (20%)

3 (75%)

4 (67%)

  1. *Two-tunnel group had significantly higher percentage of good-to-excellent outcomes than single-tunnel group, p = 0.03.
  2. ^No significant difference between with vs. without augmentation for single-tunnel group, p > 0.99.
  3. #No significant difference between ST-tightrope vs. ST-ST for two-tunnel group, p > 0.99.