首页> 外文期刊>JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association >Does this patient with shoulder pain have rotator cuff disease? The rational clinical examination systematic review
【24h】

Does this patient with shoulder pain have rotator cuff disease? The rational clinical examination systematic review

机译:该肩痛患者是否患有肩袖病?合理的临床检查系统评价

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

IMPORTANCE: Rotator cuff disease (RCD) is the most common cause of shoulder pain seen by physicians. OBJECTIVE: To perform ameta-analysis to identify the most accurate clinical examination findings for RCD. DATA SOURCES: Structured search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL from their inception through May 2013. STUDY SELECTION: For inclusion, a study must havemet the following criteria: (1) description of history taking, physical examination, or clinical tests concerning RCD; (2) detailing of sensitivity and specificity; (3) use of a reference standard with diagnostic criteria prespecified; (4) presentation of original data, or original data could be obtained from the authors; and (5) publication in a language mastered by one of the authors (Danish, Dutch, English, French, German, Norwegian, Spanish, Swedish). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Likelihood ratios (LRs) of symptoms and signs of RCD or of a tear, compared with an acceptable reference standard; quality scores assigned using the Rational Clinical Examination score and bias evaluated with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies assessed the examination of referred patients by specialists. Only 5 studies reached Rational Clinical Examination quality scores of level 1-2. The studies with quality scores of level 1-2 included 30 to 203 shoulders with the prevalence of RCD ranging from 33% to 81%. Among pain provocation tests, a positive painful arc test result was the only finding with a positive LR greater than 2.0 for RCD (3.7 [95% CI, 1.9-7.0]), and a normal painful arc test result had the lowest negative LR (0.36 [95% CI, 0.23-0.54]). Among strength tests, a positive external rotation lag test (LR, 7.2 [95% CI, 1.7-31]) and internal rotation lag test (LR, 5.6 [95% CI, 2.6-12]) were the most accurate findings for full-thickness tears. A positive drop arm test result (LR, 3.3 [95% CI, 1.0-11]) might help identify patients with RCD. A normal internal rotation lag test result was most accurate for identifying patients without a full-thickness tear (LR, 0.04 [95% CI, 0.0-0.58]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Because specialists performed all the clinical maneuvers for RCD in each of the included studies with no finding evaluated in more than 3 studies, the generalizability of the results to a nonreferred population is unknown. A positive painful arc test result and a positive external rotation resistance test result were the most accurate findings for detecting RCD, whereas the presence of a positive lag test (external or internal rotation) result was most accurate for diagnosis of a full-thickness rotator cuff tear.
机译:重要提示:肩袖疾病(RCD)是医生看到的肩痛的最常见原因。目的:进行ameta分析,以鉴定最准确的RCD临床检查结果。数据来源:从MEDLINE,EMBASE和CINAHL成立到2013年5月的结构化搜索。研究选择:要纳入研究,必须满足以下条件:(1)关于RCD的病史,体检或临床检查的描述; (2)详细说明敏感性和特异性; (3)使用预先确定诊断标准的参考标准; (4)原始数据的表述,或者可以从作者那里获得原始数据; (5)以其中一位作者掌握的语言出版(丹麦文,荷兰文,英文,法文,德文,挪威文,西班牙文,瑞典文)。主要结果和衡量指标:RCD或眼泪的症状和体征的可能性比(LRs),与可接受的参考标准相比;使用Rational Clinical Examination分数分配的质量分数,并使用“诊断准确性研究质量评估”工具对偏差进行评估。结果:28项研究评估了专家对转诊患者的检查。只有5项研究达到了1-2级的Rational临床考试质量得分。质量得分为1-2级的研究包括30到203个肩膀,RCD的患病率从33%到81%。在疼痛激发试验中,唯一的阳性结果是弧形疼痛试验阳性,RCD的LR大于2.0(3.7 [95%CI,1.9-7.0]),正常的弧形试验结果阴性LR最低( 0.36 [95%CI,0.23-0.54]。在强度测试中,积极的外部旋转滞后测试(LR,7.2 [95%CI,1.7-31])和内部旋转滞后测试(LR,5.6 [95%CI,2.6-12])是最准确的结果。厚的眼泪。垂臂试验阳性(LR,3.3 [95%CI,1.0-11])可能有助于识别RCD患者。正常的内部旋转滞后测试结果最准确地确定了没有全层撕裂的患者(LR,0.04 [95%CI,0.0-0.58])。结论与相关性:由于专家们在所纳入的每项研究中均进行了RCD的所有临床操作,但在超过3项研究中均未发现任何发现,因此该结果对未推荐人群的普遍性尚不清楚。疼痛弧度试验阳性和外部旋转阻力试验阳性结果是检测RCD的最准确结果,而滞后试验(外部或内部旋转)阳性的存在对于全厚度肩袖的诊断最准确眼泪。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号