45
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Current management and prognostic factors in physiotherapy practice for patients with shoulder pain: design of a prospective cohort study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Shoulder pain is disabling and has a considerable socio-economic impact. Over 50% of patients presenting in primary care still have symptoms after 6 months; moreover, prognostic factors such as pain intensity, age, disability level and duration of complaints are associated with poor outcome. Most shoulder complaints in this group are categorized as non-specific. Musculoskeletal ultrasound might be a useful imaging method to detect subgroups of patients with subacromial disorders.

          This article describes the design of a prospective cohort study evaluating the influence of known prognostic and possible prognostic factors, such as findings from musculoskeletal ultrasound outcome and working alliance, on the recovery of shoulder pain. Also, to assess the usual physiotherapy care for shoulder pain and examine the inter-rater reliability of musculoskeletal ultrasound between radiologists and physiotherapists for patients with shoulder pain.

          Methods

          A prospective cohort study including an inter-rater reliability study. Patients presenting in primary care physiotherapy practice with shoulder pain are enrolled. At baseline validated questionnaires are used to measure patient characteristics, disease-specific characteristics and social factors. Physical examination is performed according to the expertise of the physiotherapists. Follow-up measurements will be performed 6, 12 and 26 weeks after inclusion. Primary outcome measure is perceived recovery, measured on a 7-point Likert scale. Logistic regression analysis will be used to evaluate the association between prognostic factors and recovery.

          Discussion

          The ShoCoDiP (Shoulder Complaints and using Diagnostic ultrasound in Physiotherapy practice) cohort study will provide information on current management of patients with shoulder pain in primary care, provide data to develop a prediction model for shoulder pain in primary care and to evaluate whether musculoskeletal ultrasound can improve prognosis.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Development and validation of a revised short version of the working alliance inventory

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Rotator-cuff changes in asymptomatic adults. The effect of age, hand dominance and gender.

            We studied the integrity of the rotator cuff in both dominant and non-dominant shoulders of 90 asymptomatic adults between the ages of 30 and 99 years using ultrasound. The criteria for diagnosis had been validated on unembalmed cadaver specimens. We found no statistically significant difference in the incidence of impingement findings between dominant and non-dominant arms or between genders. The prevalence of partial- or full-thickness tears increased markedly after 50 years of age: these were present in over 50% of dominant shoulders in the seventh decade and in 80% of subjects over 80 years of age. Our results indicate that rotator-cuff lesions are a natural correlate of ageing, and are often present with no clinical symptoms. Treatment should be based on clinical findings and not on the results of imaging.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Clinimetric evaluation of shoulder disability questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature.

              To identify all available shoulder disability questionnaires designed to measure physical functioning and to evaluate evidence for the clinimetric quality of these instruments. Systematic literature searches were performed to identify self administered shoulder disability questionnaires. A checklist was developed to evaluate and compare the clinimetric quality of the instruments. Two reviewers identified and evaluated 16 questionnaires by our checklist. Most studies were found for the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scale (DASH), the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardised Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES). None of the questionnaires demonstrated satisfactory results for all properties. Most questionnaires claim to measure several domains (for example, pain, physical, emotional, and social functioning), yet dimensionality was studied in only three instruments. The internal consistency was calculated for seven questionnaires and only one received an adequate rating. Twelve questionnaires received positive ratings for construct validity, although depending on the population studied, four of these questionnaires received poor ratings too. Seven questionnaires were shown to have adequate test-retest reliability (ICC >0.70), but five questionnaires were tested inadequately. In most clinimetric studies only small sample sizes (n<43) were used. Nearly all publications lacked information on the interpretation of scores. The DASH, SPADI, and ASES have been studied most extensively, and yet even published validation studies of these instruments have limitations in study design, sample sizes, or evidence for dimensionality. Overall, the DASH received the best ratings for its clinimetric properties.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                BMC Musculoskelet Disord
                BMC Musculoskelet Disord
                BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
                BioMed Central
                1471-2474
                2013
                11 February 2013
                : 14
                : 62
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Faculty of Health, Research group Diagnostics, Avans University of Applied Sciences, PO Box 90.1164800, RA, Breda, The Netherlands
                [2 ]Department of General Practice, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
                [3 ]Department of General Practice, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
                [4 ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
                [5 ]Department of Radiology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
                [6 ]Fysiocollectief, Prinsenbeek, The Netherlands
                [7 ]Fysiomaatwerk, Heeswijk-Dinther, The Netherlands
                Article
                1471-2474-14-62
                10.1186/1471-2474-14-62
                3606323
                23399098
                e73724d0-5d4b-4cfe-902d-24b17a5d3e07
                Copyright ©2013 Karel et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 20 August 2012
                : 19 November 2012
                Categories
                Study Protocol

                Orthopedics
                Orthopedics

                Comments

                Comment on this article