Table 2 from Park HB, Yokota A, Gill HS, El Rassi G et al. (2005). Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for the different degrees of subacromial impingement syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 87(7): 1446-1455.
Table 3 from Park HB, Yokota A, Gill HS, El Rassi G et al. (2005). Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for the different degrees of subacromial impingement syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 87(7): 1446-1455.
Multiple Logistic Regressions Model Analysis of Clinical Tests According to the Different Stages of Impingement Syndrome
Caption: Table 4 from Park HB, Yokota A, Gill HS, El Rassi G et al. (2005). Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for the different degrees of subacromial impingement syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 87(7): 1446-1455. Table 4 from Park HB, Yokota A, Gill HS, El Rassi G et al. (2005). Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for the different degrees of subacromial impingement syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 87(7): 1446-1455.
The Likelihood Ratios and Post-Test Probabilities For Combining Clinical Tests According to Logistic Regression Analysis Results
Caption: Table 5 park et al. Table 5 from Park HB, Yokota A, Gill HS, El Rassi G et al. (2005). Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for the different degrees of subacromial impingement syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 87(7): 1446-1455.
Summary of Results of Interest:
Group 1 - Neer's test is the most sensitive test (85.7%) with the highest positive predictive value (20.9%) and negative predictive value (95.7%).
Group 2 - Neer's test and Hawkins-Kennedy tests were highly sensitive (75.4%), but specificity was under 50% each.
Group 3 - Painful arc test was the most sensitive test (75.8%) and had the highest negative predictive value (76.4%) whereas the drop-arm test was most specific (87.5%). The infraspinatus muscle strength test and the supraspinatus muscle strength test had the highest positive predictive values (69.1% and 68.0%, respectively) with the highest overall accuracy (~70% each). The painful arc test , the drop-arm test , and infraspinatus muscle strength test had the best post-test probability (91%) and also had a very low post-test probability if all three tests were negative (9%).
Conclusions
The best combination of tests to detect subacromial impingement of any degree are a positive Hawkins-Kennedy test , a painful arc test , and infraspinatus muscle strength tests . Post-test probabilities indicate that an individual who tests positive for all three will have a 95% chance of having some degree of RTC tear and subacromial impingement. Conversely, if these three tests were negative, that individual would have less than 24% chance to have impingement syndrome of any severity.
The best combination of tests to detect a full-thickness RTC tear are a positive painful arc test , drop-arm test , and infraspinatus muscle strength test .
Conclusions of the ResearchersThe severity of RTC pathology will change the diagnostic utility of the clinical tests used to detect subacromial impingement. Clinicians should account for the variability of these tests when evaluating individuals suspected of RTC involvement.
Caption: The painful arc test can help determine the integrity of the rotator cuff musculature, specifically supraspinatus. A positive test is the inability of the individual to lower their arm under control from 90 degrees of shoulder abduction. The drop arm test can help determine the integrity of the rotator cuff musculature, specifically supraspinatus. A positive test is the inability of the individual to lower their arm to their side under control from 90 degrees of shoulder abduction.
Review & Commentary:
This study investigated the diagnostic utility of 8 commonly used subacromial impingement tests in individuals with varying degrees of rotator cuff (RTC) pathology. The purpose of the study was to validate a cluster of tests that could be used to distinguish degrees of RTC tears in individuals with subacromial impingement syndrome.
The current study had strengths to its methodology. This study is one of the first to look at the diagnostic utility of commonly used subacromial impingement tests in three distinct groups of people: those with no RTC tears, those with small/partial RTC tears, and those with full thickness RTC tears. Implications to clinical practice are discussed below. The prospective design of the study (over an 11 year time-frame) allowed a single examiner to perform all assessments used for analysis, reducing inter-rater discrepancies. The examiner was also blinded to the patient's shoulder pathology at the time of the assessment which minimizes observer bias. Last, the large sample size of 552 patients provides adequate statistical power to make determinations about the efficacy of the clusters.
There were limitations to the study that should be mentioned prior to integration into clinical practice. Force application measurements for strength assessments such as the infraspinatus muscle strength test were not standardized across patients. The absence of force standardization is important to consider as it could alter clinical decision-making (judging a test as "positive" versus "negative") and reduce chances of an appropriate diagnosis. Similarly, the judgment of the arm "giving way" in the supraspinatus muscle strength test should have been qualified/quantified in the methodology. There were several commonly used tests that were not included in this study, such as the lift-off test (used to test subscapularis muscle integrity). The inclusion of other RTC tests could potentially lead to increased sensitivity or specificity of an RTC tear diagnostic cluster, and should be considered in future research. Last, clinicians should be careful in extrapolating the results of the current study to other patient populations, as most patients in this sample had complete RTC tears. This is not indicative of the actual prevalence of full RTC tears, and the reliability, specificity and sensitivity of these tests (clusters) may vary greatly for other populations. For example, patient populations that include overhead athletes or individuals with painful multi-directional instability may result in far more false positives. Future studies should investigate the diagnostic utility of these tests in other patient populations. Despite these limitations, the study's findings has important clinical implications and utility in the detection of RTC pathology in individuals with subacromial impingement.
Why is this study important?
Subacromial impingement may be secondary to partial or full thickness rotator cuff (RTC) tears. As rotator cuff pathology may result in precautions, the exclusion of specific interventions, or implicate the need for further diagnostic testing/medical intervention, it is important that the human movement professional has a means of differentiating primary subacromial impingement syndrome from subacromial impingement syndrome secondary to RTC pathology. The current study reports on the diagnostic utility of clusters of tests that can be used to differentiate degrees of RTC pathology present with subacromial impingement.
How does it affect practice?
The best combination of tests to detect subacromial impingement with RTC tear of any degree are the Hawkins-Kennedy test , painful arc test , and infraspinatus muscle strength tests . Individuals who test positive for all three tests have a 95% chance of having subacromial impingement; whereas, all three tests being negative results in less than a 24% chance of having impingement syndrome of any severity.
The best combination of tests to detect a full-thickness RTC tear are a positive painful arc test , drop-arm test , and infraspinatus muscle weakness test .
Further research is needed to differentiate partial RTC tears from full-thickness tears.
How does it relate to Brookbush Institute Content?
It is hypothesized that subacromial impingement syndrome (SIS) is the result of arthrokinematic dyskinesis of the glenohumeral joint , resulting in irritation/inflammation of subacromial tissues and pain. Further, this arthrokinematic dyskinesis is likely the result of one or more of a predictable set of compensations described in the Brookbush Institute predictive model of Upper Body Dysfunction (UBD) . As this impairment involves multiple joints, muscles, nerves and fascial structures, a thorough movement assessment is recommended before recommending an intervention/corrective program. Testing clusters, like the one discussed in this study, are used by the Brookbush Institute to “clear” the patient/client for further assessment and treatment/exercise with a licensed practitioner. Although the results of the testing cluster may not imply specific interventions, they decrease the likelihood that a patient/client’s time, financial resources, motivation and health are squandered on a conservative intervention that cannot be effective based on the nature of the pathology. In the case of the Park et al. SIS/RTC Testing Cluster , ruling out RTC pathologies by testing negative on 3 or more tests combined with an unremarkable subjective assessment, would imply that a patient/client is likely to improve under our care (Physical Therapists, Athletic Trainer, Chiropractor).
The videos below describe, demonstrate and discuss the tests used in this study:
Brookbush Institute Videos
Park et al. Rotator Cuff Tear with Subacromial Impingement Testing Cluster
Hawkins Kennedy
Painful Arc Test
External Rotation Resisted Strength Test (Infraspinatus Muscle Weakness Test)
Drop Arm Test
Full Can/Empty Can Tests
References
- Michener LA, Walsworth MK, Doukas WC, Murphy KP. (2009). Reliability and diagnostic accuracy of 5 physical examination tests and combination of tests for subacromial impingement. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 90: 1898-1903.
© 2016 Brent Brookbush
Questions, comments, and criticisms are welcomed and encouraged -