Protocol for determining the diagnostic validity of physical examination maneuvers for shoulder pathology

Posterior subacromial injections are superior in differentiating a rotator cuff from a biceps pathology: A cadaveric study

Backgroud

the ideal route and accuracy of subacromial injections in shoulder pathologies are often questioned. This study aimed at comparing anterior and posterior injections in terms of subacromial space dye localization and diagnostic accuracy. We hypothesized that posterior injections would prove more accurate.

Methods

lidocaine-dye mix was injected posteriorly and anteriorly in five cadaveric shoulders each. Presence of dye was ascertained at dissection.

Results

All five posterior injections remained confined to the subacromial space. In all five anteriorly injected shoulders, the dye was seen leaking from the subacromial space into bicipital groove.

Conclusions

Varying accuracies of anterior [69-90%] and posterior [56-80%] subacromial injections have been reported. We observed both routes to be equally accurate [100%]. The dye exclusively remained within the subacromial space with posterior injections. This has higher diagnostic value in differentiating subacromial and long head of biceps pathologies. The anterior approach may have a better therapeutic role in combined subacromial and biceps pathologies.

Reliability of Common Provocative Tests for Shoulder Tendinitis

OBJECTIVE

Accurate and reliable shoulder tendinopathy examination maneuvers are essential for diagnosing and treating shoulder pain; however, studies have reported varying results as to the accuracy of common maneuvers. Thus, data from a large, cross-sectional study were used to systematically quantify the reliability and accuracy of clinical diagnostic tests.

METHODS

Baseline data from the WISTAH cohort study were used to evaluate inter-tester reliability and accuracy of common provocative shoulder examination tests compared with a case definition of shoulder tendinitis.

RESULTS

Inter-tester reliability showed reliable consistency between providers with kappa coefficients between 89.5% and 94.8% for all tests. However, sensitivity was generally poor (3.0% to 60.6%). Specificity was consistently high (96.2% to 99.6%).

CONCLUSION

Common shoulder provocative tests show low sensitivity but high specificity, which implies that the primary utility of examination maneuvers is for their negative predictive values.

Clinical Assessment of Physical Examination Maneuvers for Superior Labral Anterior to Posterior Lesions

Purpose  Shoulder pain and disability pose a diagnostic challenge owing to the numerous etiologies and the potential for multiple disorders to exist simultaneously. The evidence to support the use of clinical tests for superior labral anterior to posterior complex (SLAP) is weak or absent. The purpose of this study is to determine the diagnostic validity of physical examination maneuvers for SLAP lesions by performing a methodologically rigorous, clinically applicable study.

Methods  We recruited consecutive new shoulder patients reporting pain and/or disability. The physician took a history and indicated their certainty about each possible diagnosis (“certain the diagnosis is absent/present,” or “uncertain requires further testing”). The clinician performed the physical tests for diagnoses where uncertainty remained. Magnetic resonance imaging arthrogram and arthroscopic examination were the gold standards. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios (LRs) and investigated whether combinations of the top tests provided stronger predictions.

Results  Ninety-three patients underwent physical examination for SLAP lesions. When using the presence of a SLAP lesion (Types I–V) as disease positive, none of the tests was sensitive (10.3–33.3) although they were moderately specific (61.3–92.6). When disease positive was defined as repaired SLAP lesion (including biceps tenodesis or tenotomy), the sensitivity (10.5–38.7) and specificity (70.6–93.8) of tests improved although not by a substantial amount. None of the tests was found to be clinically useful for predicting repairable SLAP lesions with all LRs close to one. The compression rotation test had the best LR for both definitions of disease (SLAP tear present = 1.8 and SLAP repaired = 1.67). There was no optimal combination of tests for diagnosing repairable SLAP lesions, with at least two tests positive providing the best combination of measurement properties (sensitivity 46.1% and specificity 64.7%).

Conclusion  Our study demonstrates that the physical examination tests for SLAP lesions are poor diagnostic indicators of disease. Performing a combination of tests will likely help, although the magnitude of the improvement is minimal. These authors caution clinicians placing confidence in the physical examination tests for SLAP lesions rather we suggest that clinicians rely on diagnostic imaging to confirm this diagnosis.

An update and further testing of a knowledge-based diagnostic clinical decision support system for musculoskeletal disorders of the shoulder for use in a primary care setting

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

A prototype diagnostic clinical decision support system (CDSS) was developed to assist primary care clinicians (general practitioners) in clinical decision making, aimed at reducing diagnostic errors. The prototype CDSS showed some promise with high levels of validity and reliability; however, issues regarding the underlying Bayesian belief network (BBN), small sample size and use of radiological imaging as a gold standard measure were highlighted that required further investigation before considering clinical testing.

METHODS

The prototype CDSS was reviewed and updated based on computer science literature and expert (orthopaedic consultant) opinion. The updated CDSS was tested by comparing its diagnostic outcome against the diagnosis of 93 case studies as determined by expert opinion combined with arthroscopy findings or radiological imaging.

RESULTS

The updated CDSS showed significant high levels of sensitivity (91%), specificity (98%), positive likelihood ratio (53.12) and negative likelihood ratio (0.08) with a kappa value of 0.88 to a confidence level of 99% compared with expert diagnosis combined with arthroscopy findings or radiological imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that the updated CDSS has addressed the issues highlighted from the initial research while maintaining high levels of validity and reliability. The updated CDSS is now ready for clinical testing.

Clinical Assessment of Physical Examination Maneuvers for Rotator Cuff Lesions

BACKGROUND

Shoulder pain and disability pose a diagnostic challenge for clinicians owing to the numerous causes that exist. Unfortunately, the evidence in support of most clinical tests is weak or absent.

PURPOSE

To determine the diagnostic validity of physical examination maneuvers for rotator cuff lesions.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

Consecutive shoulder patients recruited for this study were referred to 2 tertiary orthopaedic clinics. A surgeon took a thorough history and indicated his or her certainty about each possible diagnosis. A clinician performed the physical examination for diagnoses where uncertainty remained. Arthroscopy was considered the reference standard for patients who underwent surgery, and MRI with arthrogram was considered the reference for patients who did not. The sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios were calculated to investigate whether combinations of the top tests provided stronger predictions of the presence or absence of disease.

RESULTS

There were 139 participants. None of the tests were highly sensitive for diagnosing rotator cuff tears or tendinosis. Tests for subscapularis tears were all highly specific. No optimal combination of tests improved the ability to correctly diagnose rotator cuff tears. Closer analysis revealed the internal rotation and lateral rotation lag sign did not improve the ability to diagnose subscapularis or supraspinatus tears, respectively, although the lateral rotation lag sign demonstrated a discriminatory ability for tear size.

CONCLUSION

No test in isolation is sufficient to diagnose a patient with rotator cuff damage. A combination of tests improves the ability to diagnose damage to the rotator cuff. It is recommended that the internal rotation and lateral rotation lag signs be removed from the gamut of physical examination tests for supraspinatus and subscapularis tears.