rformed with a 3.0-T magnet; 28%, with a 1.5-T magnet; and 5%, with a \< 1.0-T magnet. Demographics, overall outcomes, SSc tendon tear types, and prevalence of concomitant SS and/or IS tendon injury of the cohort are shown in [Table 1](#table1-2325967120913036){ref-type="table"}. Patients with isolated SSc tendon repair were significantly younger compared with patients who had multitendon repairs (57.2 vs 64.3 years; *P* \< .0001). Significant improvements were seen in VAS pain scores (*P* \< .001) ([Table 1](#table1-2325967120913036){ref-type="table"}). We found that 90 patients (64.3%) had concurrent SS tendon repair; of these, 14 patients (10.0% of the total cohort) underwent IS tendon repair.

###### 

Overall Cohort Demographics, Outcome Scores, and Rotator Cuff Tear Characteristics (N = 140)*^a^*

![](10.1177_2325967120913036-table1)

  Parameter                                     Finding
  --------------------------------------------- ------------------
  Age, y, mean ± SD                             61.8 ± 9.9
  Follow-up, mo, mean ± SD                      51.7 ± 19.5
  Female, n (%)                                 59 (42.1)
  PROMIS-UE score (95% CI)                      50.7 (49.4-52.0)
  Preoperative VAS pain score (95% CI)          4.8 (4.4-5.2)
  Postoperative VAS pain score (95% CI)         0.8 (0.6-1.1)
  Complete SSc tendon tear, n (%)               34 (24.3)
  Tendon tear pattern, n (%)                    
   Partial SSc tear with SS and/or IS repair    65 (46.4)
   Partial isolated SSc tear                    41 (29.3)
   Complete SSc tear with SS and/or IS repair   25 (17.9)
   Complete isolated SSc tear                   9 (6.4)

*^a^*IS, infraspinatus; PROMIS-UE, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System for Upper Extremity; SS, supraspinatus; SSc, subscapularis; VAS, visual analog scale.

The prevalence of GC grade 2 change or higher was significantly greater in patients with multitendon repair relative to isolated SSc tendon repair for the SSc (*P* = .008), SS (