ChiroACCESS Clinical Review



Shoulder Impingement Syndrome: Diagnosis

This information is provided to you for use in conjunction with your clinical judgment and the specific needs of the patient.

Lead Author(s): 

Dwain M. Daniel, D.C.

  

How this evidence was rated:

Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT)



Published on

February 15, 2008

Text Size:     
The gleno-humeral joint is commonly accepted to be the most complex joint in the human body. Possibly due to the difficulty of arriving at an accurate diagnosis, the term "shoulder impingement syndrome" (SIS) has become a standard term in shoulder diagnosis. Any condition that narrows the space between the anterior/inferior aspect of the acromion and coracoacromial ligament can result in SIS (1). The most common causative factors are a thickened subacromial bursa and rotator cuff tendonopathy.

According to Ostor et al there are no universally recognized tests to evaluate the upper limb and at least 20 tests are available to assess rotator cuff pathologies alone (2). Most tests have only been researched in a very limited number of studies which makes evaluation difficult. Of a myriad of tests, this monograph will attempt to identify those with the highest degree of validity and reproducibility.

Unfortunately de Winter et al and Ostor et al, in studies of 201 and 136 patients respectively, found only "fair" to "moderate" interexaminer reliability for several different SIS tests (2;3).

Most clinical tests for SIS have either high sensitivity and low specificity or high specificity and low sensitivity. This confounds their value as diagnostic tools. To fully understand the relative values of these tests it is important for the reader to understand specificity and sensitivity. High sensitivity means a negative test rules out the diagnosis. A convenient pneumonic device is SnNout (sensitivity negative rules out). High specificity means a positive test rules in the diagnosis. The pneumonic is SpPin (specificity positive rules in). A test with high specificity and low sensitivity means if the test is positive you can comfortably make the diagnosis but cannot rule out the diagnosis if the test is negative. If the test has high sensitivity and low specificity, a negative test allows you to rule out the diagnosis but a positive test does not rule in the diagnosis.

The sensitivities and specificities reported below were established using findings on surgical intervention, MRI or the injection test as the gold standard.

Adding to the difficulty of arriving at an accurate diagnosis is the finding that high pain, bilateral involvement and chronicity degrade accuracy of many tests (3).

AttentionIn order to view the full content of this review, which includes information broken down by topic, you must be a registered user of ChiroACCESS. The primary mission of ChiroACCESS is to disseminate accurate user-friendly information to practicing chiropractors, faculty and students of chiropractic in order to ensure the best possible patient care.

Please click on the following link in order to register at ChiroACCESS and view the full detail of this clinical review.

If you already have an account, you may log in at this time.



References

1. 

Calis M, Akgun K, Birtane M, Karacan I, Calis H, Tuzun F. Diagnostic values of clinical diagnostic tests in subacromial impingement syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis 2000; 59(1):44-47.



2. 

Ostor AJ, Richards CA, Prevost AT, Hazleman BL, Speed CA. Interrater reproducibility of clinical tests for rotator cuff lesions. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63(10):1288-1292.



3. 

de Winter AF, Jans MP, Scholten RJ, Deville W, van Schaardenburg D, Bouter LM. Diagnostic classification of shoulder disorders: interobserver agreement and determinants of disagreement. Ann Rheum Dis 1999; 58(5):272-277.



4. 

Park HB, Yokota A, Gill HS, El Rassi G, McFarland EG. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for the different degrees of subacromial impingement syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87(7):1446-1455.



5. 

Litaker D, Pioro M, El Bilbeisi H, Brems J. Returning to the bedside: using the history and physical examination to identify rotator cuff tears. J Am Geriatr Soc 2000; 48(12):1633-1637.



6. 

Birtane M, Calis M, Akgun K. The diagnostic value of magnetic resonance imaging in subacromial impingement syndrome. Yonsei Med J 2001; 42(4):418-424.



7. 

Leroux JL, Thomas E, Bonnel F, Blotman F. Diagnostic value of clinical tests for shoulder impingement syndrome. Rev Rhum Engl Ed 1995; 62(6):423-428.



8. 

MacDonald PB, Clark P, Sutherland K. An analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of the Hawkins and Neer subacromial impingement signs. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2000; 9(4):299-301.



9. 

Hegedus EJ, Goode A, Campbell S, Morin A, Tamaddoni M, Moorman CT et al. Physical Examination Tests of the Shoulder: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis of Individual Tests. Br J Sports Med 2007.



10. 

Ostor AJ, Richards CA, Prevost AT, Speed CA, Hazleman BL. Diagnosis and relation to general health of shoulder disorders presenting to primary care. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2005; 44(6):800-805.



11. 

Holtby R, Razmjou H. Validity of the supraspinatus test as a single clinical test in diagnosing patients with rotator cuff pathology. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2004; 34(4):194-200.



12. 

Barth JR, Burkhart SS, De Beer JF. The bear-hug test: a new and sensitive test for diagnosing a subscapularis tear. Arthroscopy 2006; 22(10):1076-1084.



13. 

Steven Kleinfield. 2-27-2008. Ref Type: Personal Communication



14. 

Dinnes J, Loveman E, McIntyre L, Waugh N. The effectiveness of diagnostic tests for the assessment of shoulder pain due to soft tissue disorders: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess 2003; 7(29):iii, 1-iii166.



15. 

Awerbuch MS. The clinical utility of ultrasonography for rotator cuff disease, shoulder impingement syndrome and subacromial bursitis. Med J Aust 2008; 188(1):50-53.



16. 

Iannotti JP, Ciccone J, Buss DD, Visotsky JL, Mascha E, Cotman K et al. Accuracy of office-based ultrasonography of the shoulder for the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87(6):1305-1311.



17. 

Naredo E, Aguado P, De Miguel E, Uson J, Mayordomo L, Gijon-Banos J et al. Painful shoulder: comparison of physical examination and ultrasonographic findings. Ann Rheum Dis 2002; 61(2):132-136.



18. 

Ebell MH. Diagnosing rotator cuff tears. Am Fam Physician 2005; 71(8):1587-1588.