Shoulder Dislocation (Adult)

1. Overview

The glenohumeral joint is the most commonly dislocated major joint in the body, accounting for approximately 45% of all joint dislocations. [1] This high susceptibility to dislocation stems from the joint's unique anatomy: a relatively large humeral head articulating with a shallow glenoid fossa, providing exceptional range of motion at the expense of inherent stability. The incidence of traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation ranges from 11 to 29 per 100,000 persons per year, with a bimodal age distribution affecting young athletes and older adults. [1]

Anterior dislocation constitutes 95-97% of all shoulder dislocations, typically occurring from forced abduction, extension, and external rotation of the arm. [2] The clinical significance extends beyond the acute injury: recurrent instability remains a major source of morbidity, with recurrence rates inversely proportional to age at first dislocation. Young patients under 20 years face recurrence rates exceeding 90% without surgical intervention, while those over 40 years have less than 10% recurrence but significantly higher rates of associated rotator cuff tears (30-80%). [3,4]

The management of shoulder dislocation requires careful consideration of patient age, activity level, associated injuries, and risk factors for recurrence. Associated lesions include the Bankart lesion (anteroinferior labral tear), Hill-Sachs lesion (posterolateral humeral head compression fracture), and neurovascular injuries, particularly of the axillary nerve. Modern treatment algorithms incorporate risk stratification tools such as the Instability Severity Index Score (ISIS) to guide decision-making between conservative management, arthroscopic Bankart repair, and open bone augmentation procedures like the Latarjet procedure. [5]

---

2. Epidemiology

Demographics and Incidence

Shoulder dislocation demonstrates a clear bimodal age distribution with distinct patterns:

The overall incidence of first-time shoulder dislocation is 24 per 100,000 persons per year. [1] Male patients are 2-3 times more likely to sustain a shoulder dislocation than females, with this disparity most pronounced in the younger age group due to higher participation in contact and collision sports. [4]

Recurrence Rates

Recurrent instability following first-time anterior traumatic shoulder dislocation represents a critical clinical concern, with rates varying dramatically by patient factors:

Age-stratified recurrence rates (conservative management): [4]

• Under 20 years: 90% recurrence
• 20-40 years: 50% recurrence
• Over 40 years: less than 10% recurrence

A nationwide database study from Taiwan demonstrated cumulative redislocation rates of 9.4% at 1 year, 12.7% at 2 years, and 17.0% at 5 years following first-time dislocation treated conservatively. [6] The mean time to first recurrence was 13.1 months. Notably, patients who experienced a second dislocation had a 44% risk of third dislocation, with no significant differences between age or sex groups, suggesting that surgical intervention should be strongly considered after the second episode. [6]

Direction of Dislocation

Posterior dislocations are frequently missed on initial presentation, with delays in diagnosis occurring in up to 50% of cases due to subtle radiographic findings and atypical clinical presentation. [7]

Associated Injuries

The prevalence of associated lesions increases with recurrent dislocations: [8]

Neurological complications occur in 5.4-55% of dislocations, with the axillary nerve being the most commonly affected structure both as an isolated injury and in combination with other nerves. [9]

---

3. Aetiology & Pathophysiology

Anatomical Basis of Instability

The glenohumeral joint represents an anatomical compromise between mobility and stability. The humeral head is approximately three times larger than the glenoid fossa, creating an inherently unstable articulation requiring complex soft tissue and dynamic stabilization.

Static Stabilizers:

1. Glenoid Labrum: Fibrocartilaginous rim that deepens the glenoid socket by approximately 50%, increasing contact area and creating a "suction seal" effect
2. Glenohumeral Ligaments: Three thickened bands of the joint capsule
   • Superior Glenohumeral Ligament (SGHL): Limits inferior translation when arm is adducted
   • Middle Glenohumeral Ligament (MGHL): Resists anterior translation in mid-range
   • Inferior Glenohumeral Ligament Complex (IGHLC): Primary restraint to anterior-inferior translation in abduction and external rotation (the classic dislocation position)
3. Joint Capsule: Provides baseline constraint but is relatively lax to permit wide range of motion
4. Articular Congruity: Negative intra-articular pressure creates adhesion-cohesion forces

Dynamic Stabilizers:

1. Rotator Cuff Muscles: Provide concavity compression, centering the humeral head
   • Supraspinatus (superior)
   • Infraspinatus (posterior)
   • Teres minor (posterior)
   • Subscapularis (anterior) - critical anterior restraint
2. Long Head of Biceps: Superior humeral head stabilization
3. Deltoid: Provides general joint compression
4. Scapular Stabilizers: Ensure optimal glenoid positioning (periscapular muscles)

Exam Detail: ### Molecular Pathophysiology of Dislocation

The mechanism of anterior shoulder dislocation involves a cascade of structural failures:

1. Initial Force Application: During forceful abduction and external rotation, tensile forces concentrate on the anterior-inferior capsulolabral complex
2. IGHLC Failure: The inferior glenohumeral ligament complex becomes maximally tensioned, creating stress concentration at its glenoid attachment
3. Labral Avulsion (Bankart Lesion): The anteroinferior labrum detaches from the glenoid rim, often with a periosteal sleeve (classic Bankart lesion). Variants include:
   • ALPSA (Anterior Labroligamentous Periosteal Sleeve Avulsion): Labrum avulses but periosteum remains intact, causing medial displacement
   • Perthes Lesion: Labral detachment with intact but stripped periosteum
   • GLAD (Glenolabral Articular Disruption): Anterior labral tear with glenoid cartilage injury
4. Humeral Head Translation: With loss of anterior restraint, the humeral head translates anteriorly, typically in an antero-inferior direction
5. Hill-Sachs Lesion Formation: As the humeral head dislocates anteriorly, the posterolateral aspect impacts against the anterior glenoid rim, creating a compression fracture ("Hill-Sachs impaction fracture")
6. Capsular Stretching: The capsule undergoes plastic deformation, contributing to chronic instability

Bone Loss Dynamics: With recurrent dislocations, progressive bone loss occurs at both the glenoid (bony Bankart with glenoid rim fracture) and humerus (enlarging Hill-Sachs lesion). Glenoid bone loss exceeding 20-25% of the anterior-posterior diameter significantly increases failure rates of soft tissue repair alone. [10]

The Concept of Glenoid Track: The glenoid track represents the contact area between the glenoid and humeral head during shoulder motion. A Hill-Sachs lesion is considered "on-track" if it remains medial to the glenoid contact area throughout functional range of motion. "Off-track" lesions engage the anterior glenoid rim, levering the head into redislocation, and require either bone grafting or remplissage procedure in addition to Bankart repair. [11]

Mechanism of Injury by Direction

Anterior Dislocation (95-97%):

• Classic mechanism: Forced abduction, extension, and external rotation
• Common scenarios:
  • "Sports: Tackling with arm abducted (rugby, American football)"
  • "Falls: Landing on outstretched hand with arm abducted"
  • "Throwing: Extreme cocking phase forces"
• Force vector: Anteroinferior displacement, humeral head comes to rest subcoracoid (most common), subglenoid, or rarely subclavicular

Posterior Dislocation (2-4%):

• Classic mechanism: Forced internal rotation and adduction
• Common scenarios:
  • Seizures (tonic muscle contraction overwhelms external rotators)
  • Electrocution (similar mechanism to seizures)
  • "High-energy trauma: Dashboard injury, fall on flexed adducted arm"
• Associated features: Frequently bilateral in seizures, often missed diagnosis

Inferior Dislocation - Luxatio Erecta (less than 0.5%):

• Mechanism: Hyperabduction force levers humeral head inferiorly
• Presentation: Arm locked in overhead position
• High complication rate: Neurovascular injury (60%), rotator cuff tears (80%), greater tuberosity fractures (80%)

Associated Pathological Lesions

Soft Tissue Lesions:

1. Bankart Lesion (59% first-time, 66% recurrent): Anteroinferior labral detachment from glenoid rim, considered the "essential lesion" of traumatic anterior instability
2. HAGL Lesion (Humeral Avulsion of Glenohumeral Ligament): Rare variant where IGHLC avulses from humeral insertion rather than glenoid
3. Rotator Cuff Tear: Increasingly common with age, present in 30-80% of dislocations in patients > 40 years [4]
4. SLAP Lesion (Superior Labral Anterior-Posterior): Superior labral tear involving biceps anchor

Bony Lesions:

1. Hill-Sachs Lesion (71% first-time, 85% recurrent): Posterolateral humeral head compression fracture. Size and engagement potential determine clinical significance
2. Bony Bankart: Fracture of anterior-inferior glenoid rim. Clinically significant when > 20-25% of glenoid diameter
3. Greater Tuberosity Fracture: More common in older patients; acts as protective factor against recurrence (OR 0.13) but increases risk of stiffness and rotator cuff dysfunction [4]

Neurovascular Injuries:

1. Axillary Nerve (most common): 5-10% incidence in acute dislocations
2. Brachial Plexus: 5.4-55% overall neurological complication rate, with infraclavicular portions most affected [9]
3. Axillary Artery: Rare but serious, more common in elderly with atherosclerotic vessels

---

4. Clinical Presentation

Symptoms

Acute Dislocation:

• Severe pain: Immediate onset, localized to shoulder
• Audible/palpable "pop" or "clunk": Often reported at moment of injury
• Immediate loss of function: "Dead arm" sensation
• Deformity awareness: Patient typically recognizes abnormal shoulder appearance
• Parasthesias: Numbness or tingling in axillary nerve distribution (lateral deltoid) or down arm

Recurrent Instability:

• Apprehension: Fear of dislocation with arm in provocative positions
• Subluxation events: "Shoulder slipping out" sensation without complete dislocation
• Activity limitation: Avoidance of overhead activities or positions of vulnerability
• Reduced force generation: Weakness due to muscle inhibition from instability

Signs

Anterior Dislocation (95-97%)

General Inspection:

• Posture: Arm held in slight abduction (typically 20-30°) and external rotation, supported by contralateral hand
• Distress: Patient reluctant to move shoulder, guards position carefully
• Mechanism: May have visible trauma from initiating injury

Shoulder Contour:

• "Squared-off" appearance: Loss of normal deltoid roundness
• Prominent acromion: Acromion becomes most lateral shoulder landmark
• Anterior fullness: May be visible in thin patients (subcoracoid positioning)
• Lateral shoulder hollow: Absence of humeral head beneath acromion

Palpation:

• Humeral head: May be palpable anteriorly, typically in subcoracoid region
• Empty glenoid fossa: Sulcus beneath acromion
• Tenderness: Generalized shoulder tenderness

Neurovascular Examination (CRITICAL):

Must be documented pre- and post-reduction:

1. Axillary Nerve (most commonly injured):

   • Sensory: Test sensation over lateral deltoid ("regimental badge area")
   • Motor: Assess deltoid contraction (difficult when dislocated; recheck post-reduction)

2. Musculocutaneous Nerve:

   • Sensory: Lateral forearm sensation
   • Motor: Elbow flexion strength (biceps)

3. Radial, Median, Ulnar Nerves: Test as per standard upper limb neurological examination

4. Vascular Assessment:

   • Radial pulse: Compare to contralateral
   • Capillary refill: Digital perfusion
   • Hand warmth and color: Distal perfusion indicators

Clinical Pearl: The "Regimental Badge" Sign: The patch of sensation over the lateral deltoid innervated by the axillary nerve is termed the "regimental badge area" (historically where military insignia was positioned on the uniform). Loss of sensation here indicates axillary nerve injury, present in 5-10% of acute anterior dislocations. Most axillary nerve injuries are neurapraxias that recover spontaneously within 3-6 months, but documentation is essential for medicolegal purposes and to identify patients requiring nerve conduction studies if recovery is delayed beyond 3 months. [9]

Posterior Dislocation (2-4%) - "The Missed Diagnosis"

Posterior dislocation is frequently missed on initial presentation due to subtle clinical and radiographic findings. High index of suspicion required in specific mechanisms:

Presentation:

• Posture: Arm held in adduction and internal rotation
• Mechanism clues: Seizure, electrocution, or high-energy trauma
• Bilateral involvement: Consider in post-seizure patients

Key Examination Finding:

• Locked internal rotation: PATHOGNOMONIC - Patient cannot externally rotate arm beyond neutral
• Inability to supinate: Cannot turn palm upward with elbow at side
• Prominent coracoid: More noticeable than in anterior dislocation
• Posterior shoulder fullness: Difficult to appreciate in muscular patients
• Flattened anterior shoulder: Loss of anterior deltoid contour

Radiographic "Lightbulb Sign": On AP radiograph, the humeral head appears perfectly circular (like a lightbulb) because it is locked in internal rotation, hiding the normal greater tuberosity profile. This is highly suggestive of posterior dislocation.

Inferior Dislocation - Luxatio Erecta (less than 0.5%)

Dramatic Presentation:

• Arm locked overhead: Fully abducted, cannot be brought down
• Severe pain and distress
• High neurovascular injury rate: 60% have associated nerve or vascular injury
• Humeral head palpable laterally: Inferior to glenoid

Chronic Unreduced Dislocation

Rare presentation, usually in:

• Patients with reduced consciousness (head injury, intoxication)
• Elderly with cognitive impairment
• Posterior dislocations that were initially missed

Features:

• Established deformity: Patient may have adapted positioning
• Fibrosis and contracture: Reduction increasingly difficult after 3-4 weeks
• Neurovascular complications: Higher risk of traction injuries
• Management: May require open reduction if > 3-4 weeks old

---

5. Differential Diagnosis

Accurate diagnosis is usually straightforward with typical presentation, but several conditions must be considered:

"The Terrible Triad of the Shoulder": Simultaneous shoulder dislocation, brachial plexus injury, and vascular injury - rare but devastating combination requiring urgent vascular surgery consultation.

---

6. Investigations

Imaging Protocol

First-Line: Plain Radiography

Trauma Series (Minimum 2 Views Mandatory):

1. Anteroposterior (AP) View in Scapular Plane ("Grashey View"):

   • Shows humeral head position relative to glenoid
   • In anterior dislocation: Loss of normal "half-moon" overlap; humeral head displaced medially/inferiorly
   • Identifies associated fractures (greater tuberosity, glenoid rim)
   • Cannot reliably exclude posterior dislocation

2. Scapular Y-Lateral View (Scapular AP):

   • Profiles scapula as a "Y"

• coracoid (anterior), acromion (superior), scapular body (posterior)
  • Glenoid sits at junction of Y
  • Anterior dislocation: Humeral head anterior to glenoid (toward coracoid)
  • Posterior dislocation: Humeral head posterior to glenoid
  • Normal: Humeral head centered on glenoid

3. Axillary Lateral View (ESSENTIAL):
   • Gold standard for determining direction of dislocation
   • Shows humeral head position relative to glenoid in transverse plane
   • Identifies Hill-Sachs lesions
   • Identifies glenoid rim fractures (bony Bankart)
   • Technique: Arm must be gently abducted; if not possible, use modified Velpeau view (patient leans back over cassette)

Clinical Pearl: "The Axillary View is King": Posterior shoulder dislocations are frequently missed when only an AP view is obtained. The axillary view is mandatory to definitively exclude posterior dislocation. If patient cannot tolerate standard axillary positioning due to pain, use the Velpeau axillary view: patient leans backwards over the X-ray cassette with arm in sling, allowing horizontal beam to pass through axilla without requiring abduction. Never accept "two views" if they are only AP and scapular Y - demand the axillary or equivalent.

Post-Reduction Radiographs:

• Mandatory to confirm concentric reduction
• Repeat all trauma series views
• Identify fractures that may have been obscured pre-reduction
• Document any iatrogenic injury from reduction maneuver

Special Views

1. Stryker Notch View: Profiles posterolateral humeral head for Hill-Sachs lesion
2. West Point View: Tangential view of anteroinferior glenoid for bony Bankart
3. Apical Oblique View: Another tangential glenoid view

Advanced Imaging

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) / MR Arthrography (MRA):

Indications:

• Planning surgical management (first-time or recurrent)
• Suspected rotator cuff tear (especially > 40 years)
• Evaluation of labral pathology
• Assessment of capsular injuries (HAGL, ALPSA)

MRA advantages over standard MRI:

• Intra-articular contrast distends capsule and outlines labral tears
• Superior sensitivity for Bankart lesions (90-95% vs. 85% for MRI)
• Better visualization of capsulolabral anatomy

What MRI/MRA shows:

• Bankart lesion: Labral detachment from anteroinferior glenoid
• Hill-Sachs lesion: Posterolateral humeral head impaction (size measurement for surgical planning)
• Bony Bankart: Glenoid rim fracture
• ALPSA, Perthes, HAGL lesions
• Rotator cuff tears: Especially in patients > 40 years
• SLAP lesions: Superior labral tears
• Capsular laxity: Qualitative assessment

Computed Tomography (CT):

Indications:

• Quantification of bone loss (glenoid and Hill-Sachs)
• Surgical planning for Latarjet or bone grafting procedures
• Complex fracture patterns
• Failed MRI (pacemaker, claustrophobia)

3D CT Reconstruction:

• Glenoid bone loss measurement: Essential for deciding between Bankart repair vs. Latarjet
• En-face glenoid views: Best method to quantify bone loss as percentage of inferior glenoid diameter
• Hill-Sachs sizing: Depth, width, and location relative to glenoid track
• Critical threshold: > 20-25% glenoid bone loss → Latarjet procedure superior to arthroscopic Bankart

Ultrasound (USS):

Limited role in acute dislocation but useful for:

• Point-of-care assessment of rotator cuff integrity post-reduction in older patients
• Dynamic assessment of instability in trained hands
• Not suitable for labral pathology assessment

Laboratory Investigations

Generally not required for uncomplicated traumatic dislocation. Consider:

• FBC, Coagulation: If considering procedural sedation for reduction
• Group & Save: If surgical intervention planned or high-energy trauma with other injuries

---

7. Classification & Risk Stratification

Direction Classification

Instability Severity Index Score (ISIS)

The ISIS score is a validated prognostic tool to predict risk of recurrence after arthroscopic Bankart repair and guide surgical decision-making: [5]

Score Interpretation:

• 0-2 points: Low risk - Arthroscopic Bankart repair appropriate, less than 10% recurrence
• 3-6 points: Moderate risk - Consider patient factors, 10-30% recurrence
• ≥7 points: High risk - Consider Latarjet procedure, > 30% recurrence with Bankart alone

Exam Detail: Balg and Boileau's Original ISIS Study: This landmark 2007 study in JBJS-Br prospectively evaluated 131 patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair and identified the six independent risk factors above. Patients with scores ≥7 had a 70% recurrence rate compared to 0% in those with scores 0-2. The ISIS score has been externally validated in multiple subsequent studies and is now widely used internationally to counsel patients and guide surgical technique selection. [5]

Bone Loss Quantification

Glenoid Bone Loss:

Critical to surgical planning. Measured on:

• 3D CT (most accurate): En-face inferior glenoid view
• MRI: Can estimate but less accurate than CT

Measurement Method (Best Circle Method):

1. Trace inferior glenoid circle (assumes native glenoid is circular)
2. Measure defect area
3. Calculate as percentage: (Defect area / Circle area) × 100

Clinical Significance:

• less than 15% bone loss: Arthroscopic Bankart suitable
• 15-20% bone loss: Borderline - consider patient factors, consider Bankart with biologics
• > 20-25% bone loss: Latarjet procedure or glenoid bone grafting indicated [10]
• > 30% bone loss: "Inverted pear" glenoid - high failure rate with any soft tissue repair

Hill-Sachs Lesion:

Measurement:

• Width (mediolateral)
• Depth
• Location relative to glenoid track

On-Track vs. Off-Track (Critical concept): [11]

• Glenoid track = Contact zone between glenoid and humerus during shoulder motion
• On-track lesion: Hill-Sachs remains medial to track throughout motion → Can perform isolated Bankart repair
• Off-track lesion: Hill-Sachs engages glenoid rim during motion → Requires Remplissage or bone grafting in addition to Bankart repair

Calculation:

• Glenoid track width = 0.83 × Glenoid diameter - Bone loss
• Hill-Sachs interval (HSI) = Distance from rotator cuff insertion to medial edge of Hill-Sachs
• Off-track if: HSI > Glenoid track width

---

8. Management

Management of shoulder dislocation requires a systematic approach addressing:

1. Acute reduction and immediate complications
2. Associated injuries
3. Risk stratification for recurrence
4. Definitive treatment plan (conservative vs. surgical)

Emergency Management Algorithm

SHOULDER DISLOCATION PRESENTATION
            ↓
    CONFIRM DIAGNOSIS (X-ray)
            ↓
    NEUROVASCULAR ASSESSMENT
    (Document pre-reduction)
            ↓
    ANALGESIA / SEDATION
            ↓
    CLOSED REDUCTION
            ↓
    POST-REDUCTION X-RAY
    (Confirm reduction)
            ↓
    REPEAT NEUROVASCULAR EXAM
    (Document post-reduction)
            ↓
    IMMOBILIZATION (Sling 1-2 weeks)
            ↓
    RISK STRATIFICATION
        ↓           ↓           ↓
    AGE less than 20     AGE 20-40    AGE > 40
   (High Risk)    (Moderate)  (Cuff Risk)
        ↓           ↓           ↓
    Consider    Physio +     MRI Cuff
    Early        Rehab      + Physio
    Surgery    ↓              ↓
           Recurrence?    Cuff Tear?
              ↓              ↓
           Surgery      Cuff Repair

Acute Reduction Techniques

Pre-Reduction Requirements:

1. Consent: Explain procedure, risks (fracture, nerve injury, failed reduction)
2. Analgesia:
   • Intrarticular lignocaine: 20ml of 1% lidocaine injected into joint via anterolateral approach
   • Parenteral analgesia: Morphine 5-10mg IV or fentanyl 50-100mcg IV
   • Procedural sedation: Propofol or midazolam + fentanyl (requires monitoring, airway competence)
   • Entonox: Inhaled 50% nitrous oxide / 50% oxygen
3. Pre-reduction X-ray: Confirm dislocation, exclude fractures (relative contraindication to reduction attempts)
4. Neurovascular documentation: Essential medicolegal and clinical record

Reduction Techniques (Evidence-Based Comparison):

1. Cunningham Technique (Preferred First-Line in Conscious Patient)

Advantages: No/minimal sedation required, low force, patient remains comfortable, high success rate (75-89%) [12]

Technique:

1. Patient seated upright in chair
2. Operator sits facing patient
3. Muscle relaxation phase (critical):
   • Gently massage trapezius and biceps
   • Encourage patient to relax, "bore them to reduction"
   • Takes 5-20 minutes of gentle persuasion
4. Reduction phase:
   • Patient instructed to "shrug shoulders backwards"
   • Gentle traction and slight abduction applied
   • Humeral head often reduces with minimal force once muscles relaxed

Success rate: 89% in wilderness medicine study [12]
Complication rate: Extremely low (no fractures reported)

2. FARES Technique (Fast, Reliable, and Safe)

Advantages: High success rate, gentle, minimal sedation required

Technique:

1. Patient supine
2. Elbow flexed to 90°
3. Traction: Gentle continuous traction along axis of humerus
4. Oscillation: While maintaining traction, oscillate forearm side-to-side with progressively increasing arc
5. Abduction: Simultaneously, slowly abduct arm from 0° toward 90° over several minutes
6. Reduction usually occurs at 60-90° abduction

Success rate: 88-95%
Complication rate: Low

3. Stimson Technique (Gravity-Assisted)

Advantages: Very gentle, excellent for elderly/frail patients, minimal operator effort

Technique:

1. Patient prone on examination couch
2. Affected arm hangs vertically over edge of couch
3. 5-10 lb (2-5 kg) weight attached to wrist or held in hand
4. Wait 20-30 minutes for gravity and muscle fatigue to reduce dislocation
5. May gently internally/externally rotate humerus to facilitate reduction

Success rate: 90% if adequate time allowed
Disadvantages: Requires time (20-30 min), patient must tolerate prone position, cannot communicate easily

4. Kocher Technique (Classical but Higher Risk)

Historical technique, less favored now due to fracture risk. Reserved for when other methods fail.

Technique (Four-Step):

1. Traction: Elbow flexed to 90°, longitudinal traction applied
2. External Rotation: Slowly externally rotate arm (60-90°) while maintaining traction
3. Adduction: Bring elbow across chest toward contralateral shoulder
4. Internal Rotation: Rotate arm internally, placing hand on contralateral shoulder

Risk: Spiral humeral fracture if forced, especially in osteoporotic bone
Contraindication: Osteoporosis, fracture on pre-reduction X-ray

5. Milch Technique

Technique:

1. Gradual abduction and external rotation
2. Bring arm overhead (as if patient reaching up)
3. Direct pressure on humeral head to guide back into glenoid

Advantage: Can be performed patient self-reduction in recurrent dislocators
Risk: May be painful in acute first-time dislocation

6. Hippocratic Technique (DO NOT USE - Historical Only)

Described for historical completeness but no longer recommended:

• Traction with operator's foot in patient's axilla
• High risk of axillary artery and brachial plexus injury
• No place in modern practice

Failed Reduction:

• After 2-3 attempts with different techniques, consider:
  • Procedural sedation (if not already used)
  • Muscle relaxant (e.g., benzodiazepine)
  • Orthopedic consultation
  • General anesthesia in operating theater (if interposed soft tissue suspected or associated fracture)

Post-Reduction Care

Immediate Post-Reduction:

1. Confirm reduction clinically: Restoration of normal shoulder contour, pain relief, improved range of motion
2. Post-reduction X-ray series: Essential to document concentric reduction
3. Repeat neurovascular examination: Document any change from pre-reduction status
4. Check for newly apparent fractures: Greater tuberosity fractures may become visible after reduction
5. Assess rotator cuff function (in patients > 40 years):
   • Active abduction and external rotation
   • If unable to perform, suspect rotator cuff tear → arrange urgent MRI

Immobilization:

Standard Protocol: Broad arm sling for 1-2 weeks

• Provides comfort and pain relief
• Allows early soft tissue healing
• Prolonged immobilization (> 3-4 weeks) increases stiffness risk without reducing recurrence

External Rotation Sling (Controversial):

Theory: Immobilization in 10-15° external rotation may improve Bankart lesion apposition and healing
Evidence: Limited RCT data shows marginal benefit (recurrence 25% vs. 37% in some studies) but poor patient compliance
Current practice: Not routinely recommended; standard sling in internal rotation remains acceptable [13]

Physiotherapy Referral:

Timing: Begin gentle range of motion at 1-2 weeks, progressive strengthening at 3-6 weeks

Rehabilitation Goals:

1. Phase 1 (Weeks 1-2): Pain control, gentle pendular exercises
2. Phase 2 (Weeks 2-6): Progressive passive and active-assisted range of motion, avoiding provocative positions (abduction + external rotation)
3. Phase 3 (Weeks 6-12): Rotator cuff strengthening, scapular stabilization, proprioceptive training
4. Phase 4 (3-6 months): Return to sport-specific training

Avoidance: No abduction + external rotation (provocative position) for 6 weeks

Definitive Management: Conservative vs. Surgical

Decision based on:

1. Patient age
2. Activity level and occupation
3. Number of previous dislocations
4. Bone loss quantification
5. Patient preferences

Conservative (Non-Operative) Management

Indications:

• First-time dislocation in patient > 40 years (low recurrence risk)
• Low-demand patients (sedentary occupation, non-athletic)
• Significant medical comorbidities precluding surgery
• Patient preference after informed discussion

Protocol:

1. Sling immobilization 1-2 weeks
2. Structured physiotherapy program (3-6 months)
3. Activity modification
4. Education on recurrence risk and symptoms

Outcomes:

• Recurrence rate in > 40 years: less than 10% [4]
• Recurrence rate in less than 20 years: 90% [4]
• Functional outcomes: Good in low-demand patients

Risk of Rotator Cuff Tear in Elderly: 30-80% of patients > 40 years have associated rotator cuff tear. [4] MRI mandatory 2-4 weeks post-reduction if:

• Persistent weakness despite rehabilitation
• Inability to abduct or externally rotate
• Age > 60 years (higher tear prevalence)

Surgical Management

General Indications for Surgery:

1. Recurrent instability (≥2 dislocations)
2. High-risk first-time dislocators: Young (less than 25 years), contact athletes, military personnel
3. Significant bone loss (> 20% glenoid or off-track Hill-Sachs)
4. Engaging Hill-Sachs lesion
5. Failed conservative management: Persistent instability or apprehension limiting function
6. Associated injuries requiring surgery: Large rotator cuff tear, displaced glenoid rim fracture

Surgical Techniques

1. Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

Indications:

• Soft-tissue Bankart lesion
• Minimal bone loss (less than 15% glenoid)
• On-track Hill-Sachs (non-engaging)
• ISIS score less than 7

Technique:

• Arthroscopic debridement of labral tissue
• Glenoid rim preparation
• Suture anchor fixation (typically 3-4 anchors)
• Labral repair to anatomic position
• Capsular plication if indicated

Outcomes: [14]

• Recurrence rate: 6.3% at mean 5 years (vs. 46.6% conservative)
• Return to sport: 83.5% (vs. 66.0% conservative)
• Subsequent surgery rate: 4.0% (vs. 30.8% conservative)

Technical Factors Reducing Recurrence: [15]

• ≥4 suture anchors
• Anchor placement 5-8mm apart
• Inferior anchor at 5:30 position (right shoulder) / 6:30 (left shoulder)
• Capsular shift for increased tension
• Treatment of concomitant pathology (SLAP, Hill-Sachs)

Complications:

• Recurrence (see risk factors above)
• Stiffness (5-10%)
• Anchor-related complications (2-3%): Loosening, migration, chondral damage
• Nerve injury (less than 1%)
• Infection (less than 1%)

2. Latarjet Procedure (Open Coracoid Transfer)

Indications (Gold Standard for Bony Instability): [10]

• Glenoid bone loss > 20-25%
• Off-track Hill-Sachs lesion (when combined with glenoid bone loss)
• Failed arthroscopic Bankart repair
• Revision instability surgery
• Contact/collision athletes (rugby, American football, MMA)
• ISIS score ≥7

Technique:

• Deltopectoral approach
• Osteotomy of coracoid process with attached conjoint tendon (short head biceps + coracobrachialis)
• Split subscapularis tendon or take down
• Prepare anterior glenoid neck
• Position coracoid flush with glenoid articular surface
• Fixation with 2 screws (typically 3.5mm or 4.0mm malleolar screws)
• Repair subscapularis and capsule to coracoacromial ligament stump

"Triple Effect" Mechanism of Latarjet (Classic Viva Question): [10]

1. Bone Block Effect: Coracoid bone graft extends glenoid arc, increasing anteroposterior diameter by 20-30%
2. Sling Effect: Conjoint tendon (short biceps + coracobrachialis) acts as dynamic anterior sling when arm is abducted and externally rotated, preventing anterior translation
3. Capsular Repair: Repair of capsule to coracoacromial ligament remnant reinforces anterior soft tissue restraint

Outcomes:

• Recurrence rate: less than 5%, often quoted as 0-3% in experienced hands
• Return to sport: 80-90%, including contact sports
• Graft union rate: 75-100% [16]
• Patient satisfaction: 85-95%

Complications: [16]

• Graft-related:
  • "Malposition (0-75%, wide variation in definition): Medial, lateral, superior, or inferior displacement"
  • "Nonunion (0-32%, pooled 5.1%): More common with malpositioned grafts"
  • "Osteolysis (0-100%, pooled 30%): Partial resorption, usually clinically insignificant if union achieved"
  • "Fracture (0-8%, pooled 2.1%): Stress fracture of graft"
• Hardware:
  • "Prominent/painful screws (0-9.1%, pooled 5%): May require removal"
  • Screw loosening or migration
• Neurovascular:
  • Musculocutaneous nerve injury (transient 1-3%, permanent less than 1%)
  • Axillary nerve injury (less than 1%)
  • Subscapularis injury/insufficiency (1-5%)
• Osteoarthritis (0-100%, pooled 28%): Develops over time, higher with malpositioned graft or multiple pre-operative dislocations
• Recurrence: 0-5%, usually due to graft malposition or nonunion
• Stiffness/loss of external rotation: 5-15%, typically 5-10° loss

Learning Curve: Steep - expert guidance and training essential for optimal graft positioning

Exam Detail: Latarjet vs. Arthroscopic Bankart - The Evidence:

The debate between Latarjet and arthroscopic Bankart for managing recurrent anterior shoulder instability centers on balancing recurrence rates against complication profiles.

Cochrane-Level Evidence: A 2023 systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing surgical stabilization vs. immobilization for first-time dislocations demonstrated a 7.4-fold reduction in recurrence with surgery (6.3% vs. 46.6%, pless than 0.00001). [14] However, this includes both Bankart and Latarjet procedures.

Bone Loss Threshold Studies: Multiple biomechanical and clinical studies have established the critical 20-25% glenoid bone loss threshold. Below this, isolated Bankart repair can restore stability. Above this, the "inverted pear" glenoid deformity creates excessive contact forces on remaining glenoid, leading to high Bankart failure rates (30-67%). [10]

ISIS-Based Selection: The ISIS score provides objective risk stratification. In the original Balg and Boileau study, patients with ISIS ≥7 had 70% recurrence after isolated Bankart vs. less than 5% with Latarjet, while those with ISIS 0-2 had 0% recurrence with Bankart. [5] This supports selective use of Latarjet in high-risk cohorts.

Long-Term Arthritis Concern: A common argument against Latarjet is non-anatomic bone block leading to premature osteoarthritis. However, recent evidence suggests arthritis development correlates more with number of pre-operative dislocations than with Latarjet itself, and well-positioned grafts show similar arthritis rates to Bankart at 10-15 year follow-up. [17]

3. Remplissage Procedure

Indication: Large Hill-Sachs lesion (especially if engaging or off-track), usually combined with Bankart repair

Technique:

• Arthroscopic procedure
• Posterior capsule and infraspinatus tendon are sutured into Hill-Sachs defect
• "Fills" the defect, preventing engagement on anterior glenoid

Outcomes:

• Reduces recurrence rate compared to isolated Bankart when Hill-Sachs is large
• Combined Bankart + Remplissage: 5-10% recurrence

Complication: Loss of external rotation (typically 5-10°) due to posterior capsular tethering and infraspinatus tenodesis effect

4. Bone Grafting Techniques

Indications:

• Massive glenoid bone loss (> 30%)
• Failed Latarjet
• Glenoid bone loss in patients unsuitable for Latarjet (e.g., young age with open physes)

Graft Options:

• Iliac crest autograft: Gold standard, excellent healing, donor site morbidity
• Distal tibial allograft: Matches glenoid curvature, no donor site morbidity, risk of nonunion
• Fresh osteochondral allograft: For severe glenoid articular damage

Technique: Typically arthroscopic or mini-open, suspensory fixation or screw fixation

Outcomes: Comparable to Latarjet in experienced hands, but technically challenging

---

9. Complications

Immediate Complications (During Dislocation/Reduction)

Late Complications

Surgical Complications

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair:

• Recurrence: 6-27% (patient and technique dependent)
• Stiffness: 5-10%
• Anchor-related problems: 2-3%
• Infection: less than 1%
• Nerve injury: less than 1%

Latarjet Procedure:

• See detailed complications in Surgical Management section above
• Key: Graft malposition (most common), nonunion (5%), hardware issues (5%), arthritis (28% long-term) [16]

---

10. Prognosis

Natural History (Untreated/Conservatively Managed)

Prognosis is heavily age-dependent:

Young Patients (less than 20 years at first dislocation):

• Recurrence rate: 90% with conservative management [4]
• Mean time to recurrence: 13 months [6]
• After second dislocation: 44% risk of third dislocation [6]
• Long-term: Multiple dislocations lead to progressive bone loss and arthritis

Middle-Aged Patients (20-40 years):

• Recurrence rate: 50% with conservative management [4]
• Lower rate if recreational athletes vs. contact sports
• Functional outcomes variable depending on activity level

Older Patients (> 40 years):

• Recurrence rate: less than 10% [4]
• Higher risk of rotator cuff tear (30-80%)
• If cuff tear develops, prognosis for function worse unless surgically repaired
• Risk of persistent stiffness higher

Outcomes After Surgical Stabilization

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: [14]

• Recurrence rate: 6.3% at mean 5-year follow-up (vs. 46.6% conservative)
• Return to sport: 83.5% (vs. 66% conservative)
• Return to same level of sport: 65-75%
• Need for subsequent surgery: 4.0% (vs. 30.8% conservative)
• Patient satisfaction: 85-90%

Latarjet Procedure:

• Recurrence rate: less than 5%, typically 0-3% in experienced hands
• Return to sport: 80-90%, including contact sports
• Return to same level: 75-85%
• Patient satisfaction: 85-95%
• Long-term arthritis: 20-30% at 10-15 years (similar to multiple dislocations without surgery)

Prognostic Factors for Recurrence

Systematic review meta-analysis identified key predictors: [4]

Clinical Pearl: The Greater Tuberosity Paradox: Greater tuberosity fractures are associated with significantly reduced recurrence risk (OR 0.13), likely because the fracture fragment acts as a "bumper" preventing the humeral head from translating anteriorly, and the required healing period enforces prolonged immobilization. However, this comes at the cost of increased risk of stiffness and rotator cuff dysfunction, requiring careful rehabilitation. [4]

Long-Term Complications

Osteoarthritis Development:

• Risk increases with number of dislocation episodes
• 15-30% develop radiographic arthritis at 10-20 years
• Latarjet procedures may slightly increase arthritis risk if graft malpositioned, but well-positioned grafts have similar rates to recurrent dislocation [17]

Chronic Instability Without Redislocation:

• 10-30% experience persistent apprehension or subjective instability
• May limit return to sport or overhead activities
• Often responsive to rotator cuff and scapular stabilization exercises

---

11. Prevention & Activity Modification

Primary Prevention

Limited evidence for preventing first-time dislocation:

• Neuromuscular training: Proprioceptive and rotator cuff strengthening in overhead athletes may reduce risk, but evidence limited
• Protective equipment: Shoulder pads in contact sports provide minimal protection against dislocation forces
• Technique coaching: Proper tackling and falling techniques in rugby/American football

Secondary Prevention (Preventing Recurrence)

After First-Time Dislocation:

1. Structured Rehabilitation Program (3-6 months):

   • Rotator cuff strengthening (external rotators especially important)
   • Scapular stabilizer strengthening
   • Proprioceptive training
   • Progressive return to sport protocol

2. Activity Modification:

   • Avoid provocative positions (abduction + external rotation) for 6-12 weeks
   • Contact sports: Consider surgical stabilization before return, especially if less than 25 years
   • Overhead sports: Gradual return with technique modification

3. Surgical Stabilization - Strong consideration in:

   • Age less than 25 years + contact/collision sport
   • Military personnel or manual laborers
   • Competitive athletes
   • Presence of significant bone loss

Return to Sport Guidelines:

Criteria for Return to Sport (Must meet ALL):

1. Full pain-free range of motion
2. ≥90% strength compared to contralateral (isokinetic testing)
3. Sport-specific functional testing passed
4. No apprehension with provocative testing
5. Psychological readiness

---

12. Key Guidelines & Consensus Statements

International Consensus on Anterior Shoulder Instability [15]

Anterior Shoulder Instability International Consensus Group (2022) - 65 shoulder surgeons from 14 countries achieved consensus on:

Diagnosis and Assessment (Unanimous Agreement):

• History factors to evaluate: Age, sex, mechanism, number of events, reduction required, occupation, sport/level, bone loss, hyperlaxity
• Imaging: Plain radiographs (3 views including axillary) mandatory; MRI/CT for surgical planning

Non-Operative Management (Strong Consensus):

• Prognostic factors: Age, activity level, bone loss, hyperlaxity
• Immobilization position: No consensus on internal vs. external rotation (remains controversial)
• Rehabilitation protocol: Essential for all patients

Bankart Repair (Unanimous Agreement):

• Factors to consider: Age, sport, prior surgery, bone loss, patient expectations
• Complication minimization: Inferior anchor at 5-8mm intervals, multiple fixation points, treat concomitant pathology
• Recurrence reduced by well-defined rehabilitation protocol

Society Guidelines

British Elbow and Shoulder Society (BESS) - Recommend:

• Arthroscopic Bankart for first-time dislocators less than 25 years in contact sports
• Latarjet for bone loss > 20%

American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) - Moderate evidence for:

• Surgical stabilization reducing recurrence in young active patients
• Insufficient evidence to recommend specific surgical technique

European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow (SECEC-ESSSE) - Recommend:

• Risk stratification (ISIS score) to guide treatment
• Latarjet for bone loss > 20% or failed Bankart

---

Exam-Focused Sections

Common MRCS/Emergency Medicine Exam Questions

1. "A 22-year-old rugby player presents with a painful deformed shoulder after a tackle. What is your immediate management?"

Model Answer: "I would approach this systematically with an ABCDE assessment, though in isolated shoulder injury the primary concern is the shoulder itself. After ensuring no life-threatening injuries, I would:

1. Confirm clinical diagnosis: Assess for anterior dislocation features - squared-off shoulder, loss of deltoid contour, arm held in abduction and external rotation
2. Neurovascular examination: Document axillary nerve function (regimental badge sensation), distal pulses, and complete upper limb neurology pre-reduction - essential for medicolegal purposes
3. Plain radiographs: Trauma series (AP, scapular Y, and axillary lateral) to confirm dislocation direction and exclude fractures
4. Analgesia: Intrarticular lignocaine and/or parenteral opioids
5. Closed reduction: Using Cunningham or FARES technique initially, escalating to procedural sedation if required
6. Post-reduction management: Repeat X-rays, neurovascular examination, sling immobilization, physiotherapy referral

Given his age and sport, I would counsel him about the 90% recurrence risk and discuss early arthroscopic stabilization versus rehabilitation and reassessment."

2. "What are the components of the 'triple effect' of the Latarjet procedure?"

Model Answer: "The Latarjet procedure achieves stability through three synergistic mechanisms:

1. Bone block effect: The transferred coracoid process, positioned flush with the anterior glenoid rim, extends the glenoid arc by 20-30%, increasing the anteroposterior diameter and contact area, effectively preventing anterior translation
2. Sling effect: The conjoint tendon (short head of biceps and coracobrachialis), which remains attached to the transferred coracoid, acts as a dynamic anterior sling when the arm is placed in the at-risk position of abduction and external rotation, providing additional restraint
3. Capsular repair effect: The anterior capsule is repaired to the remaining coracoacromial ligament stump, reinforcing the anterior soft tissue restraint

This triple mechanism explains the excellent stability outcomes with recurrence rates below 5%, making it the procedure of choice for significant bone loss or high-risk patients."

3. "How do you assess for a posterior shoulder dislocation and why is it frequently missed?"

Model Answer: "Posterior shoulder dislocation is missed in up to 50% of cases because of subtle clinical and radiographic findings.

Clinical Assessment:

• Key finding: Inability to externally rotate the arm beyond neutral - this is pathognomonic
• Mechanism clues: Seizure, electrocution, or dashboard injury should raise suspicion
• Posture: Arm held in adduction and internal rotation (different from anterior dislocation)
• Bilateral involvement: Check both shoulders in post-seizure patients

Radiographic Assessment:

• AP view limitations: May appear near-normal or show the 'lightbulb sign' - humeral head appears perfectly circular because it's locked in internal rotation
• Axillary view is essential: Shows posterior position of humeral head relative to glenoid definitively
• Scapular Y view: Shows humeral head posterior to glenoid center

The axillary view is mandatory in all suspected shoulder dislocations to avoid missing posterior dislocations. If standard axillary view cannot be obtained due to pain, I would request a Velpeau axillary view (patient leans back over cassette)."

Viva Points - Opening Statements

Viva Point: For Anterior Shoulder Dislocation:

"Anterior shoulder dislocation is the most common major joint dislocation, accounting for 45% of all dislocations, with an incidence of 11-29 per 100,000 persons per year. [1] It predominantly affects young males involved in contact sports and has a characteristic bimodal age distribution.

The mechanism is typically forced abduction and external rotation, causing failure of the anterior capsulolabral complex, specifically the inferior glenohumeral ligament. The essential lesion is the Bankart lesion - detachment of the anteroinferior labrum from the glenoid rim - seen in approximately 60% of first-time dislocations.

The recurrence risk is inversely proportional to age: patients under 20 have a 90% recurrence rate without surgical intervention, while those over 40 have less than 10% recurrence but a significantly higher risk of associated rotator cuff tears, ranging from 30-80%. [4]

Management involves immediate reduction, neurovascular assessment, and risk stratification. The Instability Severity Index Score helps guide surgical decision-making, with scores above 7 indicating high recurrence risk with isolated Bankart repair and consideration for Latarjet procedure, particularly if glenoid bone loss exceeds 20%."

Viva Point: For ISIS Score and Surgical Planning:

"The Instability Severity Index Score, developed by Balg and Boileau in 2007, is a validated prognostic tool that predicts recurrence risk after arthroscopic Bankart repair. [5] It incorporates six independent risk factors:

• Age ≤20 years: 2 points
• Competitive sport participation: 2 points
• Contact or forced overhead sport: 1 point
• Shoulder hyperlaxity: 1 point
• Hill-Sachs visible on AP radiograph: 2 points
• Glenoid rim lesion on AP radiograph: 2 points

Patients with scores 0-2 have excellent outcomes with arthroscopic Bankart repair, showing less than 10% recurrence. Scores 3-6 indicate moderate risk. Scores ≥7 predict high failure rates with Bankart alone - up to 70% recurrence in the original study - and should prompt consideration of the Latarjet procedure, especially if significant bone loss is present.

This tool exemplifies modern risk-stratified surgical decision-making in shoulder instability management."

Common Mistakes That Fail Candidates

❌ Radiographic Errors:

• Accepting only AP and lateral views without axillary view
• Missing posterior dislocation by not requesting axillary view
• Not obtaining post-reduction X-rays to confirm reduction

❌ Neurovascular Documentation Failure:

• Not documenting pre-reduction neurovascular status (medicolegal disaster if nerve injury discovered post-reduction)
• Forgetting to recheck neurovascular status after reduction

❌ Age-Based Management Errors:

• Offering same management to 18-year-old athlete and 65-year-old retiree
• Not counseling young patients about 90% recurrence risk
• Not investigating for rotator cuff tear in elderly patients

❌ Bone Loss Ignorance:

• Performing or recommending isolated Bankart repair with > 20% glenoid bone loss
• Not understanding concept of on-track vs. off-track Hill-Sachs lesions
• Not obtaining CT for surgical planning when bone loss suspected

❌ Reduction Technique Errors:

• Using excessive force (risk of fracture)
• Performing Kocher technique in osteoporotic patient
• Not providing adequate analgesia/sedation

❌ Outdated Knowledge:

• Recommending Hippocratic technique (foot in axilla - obsolete and dangerous)
• Suggesting prolonged immobilization (> 4 weeks) increases recurrence (evidence shows no benefit)
• Not knowing current evidence on external rotation immobilization (controversial, not standard of care)

High-Yield Facts for Written Exams

1. Most common joint dislocation: Glenohumeral (45% of all dislocations)
2. Most common direction: Anterior (95-97%)
3. Most common nerve injury: Axillary nerve (5-10%)
4. Recurrence age relationship: less than 20 years = 90%; > 40 years = less than 10%
5. Bankart lesion: Anteroinferior labral tear - essential lesion of traumatic instability
6. Hill-Sachs lesion: Posterolateral humeral head compression fracture (71% first-time, 85% recurrent)
7. Lightbulb sign: Posterior dislocation on AP X-ray
8. Glenoid bone loss threshold: > 20-25% requires Latarjet, not isolated Bankart
9. ISIS score ≥7: High risk, consider Latarjet
10. Triple effect of Latarjet: Bone block + sling effect + capsular repair

---

References

1. Goth AP, Klug A, Gosheger G, et al. Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2025;122(4):89-95. doi:10.3238/arztebl.m2024.0254

2. Nazzal EM, Herman ZJ, Engler ID, et al. First-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: current concepts. J ISAKOS. 2023;8(2):101-107. doi:10.1016/j.jisako.2023.01.002

3. Robinson CM, Howes J, Murdoch H, et al. Functional outcome and risk of recurrent instability after primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation in young patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(11):2326-2336.

4. Olds M, Ellis R, Donaldson K, et al. Risk factors which predispose first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations to recurrent instability in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(14):913-922. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2014-094342

5. Balg F, Boileau P. The instability severity index score. A simple pre-operative score to select patients for arthroscopic or open shoulder stabilisation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007;89(11):1470-1477.

6. Kao JT, Chang CL, Su WR, et al. Incidence of recurrence after shoulder dislocation: a nationwide database study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018;27(8):1519-1525. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2018.02.047

7. Ladd LM, Crews M, Maertz NA. Glenohumeral Joint Instability: A Review of Anatomy, Clinical Presentation, and Imaging. Clin Sports Med. 2021;40(4):585-599. doi:10.1016/j.csm.2021.05.001

8. Rutgers C, Verweij LPE, Priester-Vink S, et al. Recurrence in traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations increases the prevalence of Hill-Sachs and Bankart lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2022;30(6):2130-2140. doi:10.1007/s00167-021-06847-7

9. Gutkowska O, Martynkiewicz J, Urban M, Gosk J. Brachial plexus injury after shoulder dislocation: a literature review. Neurosurg Rev. 2020;43(2):407-423. doi:10.1007/s10143-018-1001-x

10. Arner JW, Peebles LA, Bradley JP, Provencher MT. Anterior Shoulder Instability Management: Indications, Techniques, and Outcomes. Arthroscopy. 2020;36(11):2791-2793. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2020.09.024

11. Di Giacomo G, Itoi E, Burkhart SS. Evolving concept of bipolar bone loss and the Hill-Sachs lesion: from "engaging/non-engaging" lesion to "on-track/off-track" lesion. Arthroscopy. 2014;30(1):90-98.

12. Mulvey JM, Carson IN, Palmer KA. Closed Reduction of Anterior Shoulder Dislocations Performed by Ski Patrollers in the Alpine Prehospital Environment. Wilderness Environ Med. 2021;32(4):441-449. doi:10.1016/j.wem.2021.07.007

13. Itoi E, Hatakeyama Y, Kido T, et al. A new method of immobilization after traumatic anterior dislocation of the shoulder: a preliminary study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2003;12(5):413-415.

14. Belk JW, Wharton BR, Houck DA, et al. Shoulder Stabilization Versus Immobilization for First-Time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Level 1 Randomized Controlled Trials. Am J Sports Med. 2023;51(6):1634-1643. doi:10.1177/03635465211065403

15. Hurley ET, Matache BA, Wong I, et al. Anterior Shoulder Instability Part I-Diagnosis, Nonoperative Management, and Bankart Repair-An International Consensus Statement. Arthroscopy. 2022;38(2):214-223.e7. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2021.07.022

16. DeClercq MG, Martin MD, Whalen RJ, et al. Postoperative Radiographic Outcomes Following Primary Open Coracoid Transfer (Bristow-Latarjet) Vary in Definition, Classification, and Imaging Modality: A Systematic Review. Arthroscopy. 2024;40(4):1311-1324.e1. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2023.09.032

17. Bauer S, Collin P, Zumstein MA, et al. Current concepts in chronic traumatic anterior shoulder instability. EFORT Open Rev. 2023;8(6):468-481. doi:10.1530/EOR-22-0084

18. Bulleit CH, Hurley ET, Jing C, et al. Risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2024;33(11):2539-2549. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2024.04.017

19. Hu B, Hong J, Zhu H, et al. Arthroscopic Bankart repair versus conservative treatment for first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2023;28(1):260. doi:10.1186/s40001-023-01160-0

20. Hovelius L, Olofsson A, Sandström B, et al. Nonoperative treatment of primary anterior shoulder dislocation in patients forty years of age and younger. a prospective twenty-five year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(5):945-952.

---

Patient Education Summary

What is a shoulder dislocation?

Your shoulder ball has come out of its socket. The shoulder is the most mobile joint in your body, which makes it more prone to dislocation than other joints. In most cases (95%), the ball dislocates forward (anterior dislocation).

Will it happen again?

This depends mainly on your age:

• Teenagers and young adults (under 20): Very high chance (9 out of 10 people) of it happening again without surgery
• Middle-aged adults (20-40): Moderate chance (about 5 out of 10)
• Older adults (over 40): Low chance (less than 1 out of 10), but higher risk of rotator cuff tear

Do I need surgery?

Your doctor will help you decide based on:

• Your age
• Your activity level and sport participation
• Whether this is your first dislocation or if it has happened before
• Special scans that show if there is bone damage

Young people who play contact sports often benefit from early surgery to prevent repeated dislocations. Older people often do well without surgery but need to check for rotator cuff tears.

When can I return to sport?

• Non-contact sports: 6-12 weeks with physiotherapy
• Contact sports: 12-16 weeks (or 6-9 months if you have surgery)
• Rugby, American football, martial arts: Surgery usually recommended before return

What should I do now?

1. Wear your sling for 1-2 weeks as directed
2. Start physiotherapy to strengthen your shoulder
3. Avoid overhead activities and contact sports until cleared
4. Attend follow-up appointments to monitor recovery
5. Report any numbness, weakness, or inability to move your arm

---

Document Status: Gold Standard (52/56)
Last Updated: 2026-01-06
Next Review: 2027-01-06
Author: MedVellum Enhanced Content - Evidence-Based Medical Education