Clinimetric evaluation of shoulder disability questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To identify all available shoulder disability questionnaires designed to measure physical functioning and to evaluate evidence for the clinimetric quality of these instruments.Methods
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.Results
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.Conclusion
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.
SUBMITTER: Bot SD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC1754942 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Since labor and delivery units often serve as emergency units for pregnant women, the use of obstetric triage systems with poor or inadequate quality can lead to unintended consequences such as over and under-triage and so a waste of humans and financial resources. Therefore, this systematic review was conducted to evaluate the measurement properties of obstetric triage tools. METHODS:PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline were searched to identify studies in October 2018 and were updated in May 2019. The risk of bias COSMIN checklist was used to evaluate the quality of the studies. The quality of every measurement property was appraised by the update criteria of COSMIN. Evidence quality was judged using the modified GRADE approach. RESULTS:A total of 444 studies were retrieved in initial search. Six studies evaluating 4 tools were included in this study. All the included studies reported only content validity and reliability. The quality of evidence varied from very low to moderate. The quality of content validity and reliability of the included tools was sufficient except for the reliability of the maternal-fetal triage index. The obstetric triage acuity scale (OTAS) was found to have higher reliability than other tools. CONCLUSIONS:Due to insufficient evidence, the conclusions about the quality of measurement properties of each obstetric triage tool may be uncertain. This review emphasizes the necessity for further studies with robust methodological quality on the measurement properties of obstetric triage tools.
| S-EPMC7203833 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNeck pain is a significant health problem in modern society. There is evidence to suggest that neck muscle strength is reduced in patients with neck pain. This article provides a critical analysis of the research literature on the clinimetric properties of tests to measure neck muscle strength or endurance in patients with non-specific neck pain, which can be used in daily practice.MethodsA computerised literature search was performed in the Medline, CINAHL and Embase databases from 1980 to January 2007. Two reviewers independently assessed the clinimetric properties of identified measurement methods, using a checklist of generally accepted criteria for reproducibility (inter- and intra-observer reliability and agreement), construct validity, responsiveness and feasibility.ResultsThe search identified a total of 16 studies. The instruments or tests included were: muscle endurance tests for short neck flexors, craniocervical flexion test with an inflatable pressure biofeedback unit, manual muscle testing of neck musculature, dynamometry and functional lifting tests (the cervical progressive iso-inertial lifting evaluation (PILE) test and the timed weighted overhead test). All the articles included report information on the reproducibility of the tests. Acceptable intra- and inter-observer reliability was demonstrated for t enduranctest for short neck flexors and the cervical PILE test. Construct validity and responsiveness have hardly been documented for tests on muscle functioning.ConclusionThe endurance test of the short neck flexors and the cervical PILE test can be regarded as appropriate instruments for measuring different aspects of neck muscle function in patients with non-specific neck pain. Common methodological flaws in the studies were their small sample size and an inappropriate description of the study design.
| S-EPMC2575213 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPrevious systematic reviews have identified the multiple factors impacting on the prognosis of shoulder pain. However, the typical clinical course of subacromial shoulder pain remains unclear. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the clinical course of pain and disability in patients with subacromial shoulder pain.Method and analysisWe will systematically search electronic databases (Medline, Embase and AMED (via Ovid), Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Scopus) from the date of inception to 28 February 2018 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies with patients with subacromial shoulder pain. We will follow patient groups measured with pain and disabilities with no intervention or usual care treatment. Two reviewers will extract the data, and assess the risk of bias within included studies. We will use the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs, and a methodological quality assessment tool for observational studies. We will perform meta-analyses for changes in pain and disability scores for each group (usual care and no intervention) at different time categories (up to 6 weeks, 6-12 weeks, 12-26 weeks or more). If there are 10 or more studies, we will perform a meta-regression for each planned analysis. The outcomes of the included studies will be described individually if the above statistical methods are not possible. Findings from this review will be of interest to clinicians and researchers, and will describe the expected clinical course of subacromial shoulder pain. This study may indicate the potential differences between the clinical courses of pain and disability over time.Ethics and disseminationThis review will not gather original data, hence ethical approval is not required. The results of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at a scientific conference.Prospero registration numberCRD42016052518.
| S-EPMC5942400 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWave surfing will debut in the next Olympic Games and is increasingly popular as a sport. Chronic shoulder complaints are frequently reported amongst surfers, though literature researching its pathophysiology and prevention is scarce. This article provides an overview of the current literature, proposes a potential pathogenesis and a potential physiotherapeutic prevention program for surf-induced shoulder complaints.MethodsA systematic review was performed considering the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for articles regarding kinematic analysis of the surf paddling movement. Data sources were Embase, MEDLINE (PubMed) and Research gate. We included case series and cohort studies that originally studied or described the paddle movement made by wave surfers, studies that reported on kinesiologic analysis with nerve conduction studies and studies on 3D motion analysis of the shoulder while paddling.ResultsEight original articles were included that analysed the shoulder movement in paddling surfers. Muscles that are active during paddling are mainly internal rotators and muscles that are involved in shoulder flexion. Internal rotators are active in propelling the surfer through the water, though external rotator strength is only used while the arm is out of the water.DiscussionIn surfers with shoulder complaints, external rotation range of motion and external rotation strength are impaired. Scapulothoracic dyskinesis may occur and subacromial pain syndrome may coincide. Further research should address potential pectoralis minor shortening, which may lead to aberrant scapular tilt and lateral rotation of the scapula. The surfer's shoulder is characterised by external rotation deficit, as opposed to internal rotation deficit in the thrower's shoulder, and it differs substantially from shoulder complaints in swimmers. Therefore, a specific prevention or rehabilitation protocol for surfers is required. Decreased thoracic extension may thereby alter the risk of scapular dyskinesis and hence increase the risk of impingement around the shoulder joint. A potential physiotherapeutic prevention programme should address all these aspects, with the main goal being to increase external rotator strength and to stretch the internal rotators.ConclusionThere is a high incidence of chronic surf-induced shoulder complaints in surfers. Symptoms may arise due to imbalanced training or scapular dyskinesis, which may subsequently trigger subacromial pain. Physiotherapeutic prevention should include stretching of the internal rotators, external rotator training and optimisation of thoracic extension and scapulothoracic movement.
| S-EPMC7788157 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:The objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Constant-Murley Score (CMS) in various shoulder pathologies, based on a systematic review and expert standardized evaluations. METHODS:A systematic review was performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Titles and abstracts were reviewed and finally the included articles were grouped according to patients' pathologies. Two expert evaluators independently assessed the CMS properties of reliability, validity, responsiveness to change, interpretability and burden score in each group, using the EMPRO (Evaluating Measures of Patient Reported Outcomes) tool. The CMS properties were assessed per attribute and overall for each considered group. Only the concept and measurement model was assessed globally. RESULTS:Five individual pathologies (i.e. subacromial, fractures, arthritis, instability and frozen shoulder) and two additional groups (i.e. various pathologies and healthy subjects) were considered. Overall EMPRO scores ranged from 58.6 for subacromial to 30.6 points for instability. Responsiveness to change was the only quality to obtain at least 50 points across all groups, but for frozen shoulder. Insufficient information was obtained in relation to the concept and measurement model and great variability was seen in the other evaluated attributes. CONCLUSIONS:The current evidence does not support the CMS as a gold standard in shoulder evaluation. Its use is advisable for subacromial pathology; but data are inconclusive for other shoulder conditions. Prospective studies exploring the psychometric properties of the scale, particularly for fractures, arthritis, instability and frozen shoulder are needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Systematic review.
| S-EPMC6132990 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Nociception Coma Scale is a nociception behaviour observation tool, developed specifically for patients with disorders of consciousness (DOC) due to (acquired) brain injury. Over the years, the clinimetric properties of the NCS and its revised version (NCS-R) have been assessed, but no formal summary of these properties has been made. Therefore, we performed a systematic review on the clinimetric properties (i.e. reliability, validity, responsiveness and interpretability) of the NCS(-R). We systematically searched CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, PsycInfo and Web of Science until August 2015. Two reviewers independently selected the clinimetric studies and extracted data with a structured form. Included studies were appraised on quality with the COSMIN checklist. Eight studies were found eligible and were appraised with the COSMIN checklist. Although nearly all studies lacked sample size calculation, and were executed by the same group of authors, the methodological quality ranged from fair to excellent. Important aspects of reliability, construct validity and responsiveness have been studied in depth and with sufficient methodological quality. The overview of clinimetric properties in this study shows that the NCS and NCS-R are both valid and useful instruments to assess nociceptive behaviour in DOC patients. The studies provide guidance for the choice in NCS-R cut-off value for possible pain treatment and cautions awareness of interprofessional differences in NCS-R measurements.SignificanceThis systematic review provides a structured overview of the clinimetric properties of the Nociception Coma Scale (-Revised) and provides insights for a solid evidence-based nociception behaviour assessment and treatment plan.
| S-EPMC5600098 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe disability weight is an essential factor to estimate the healthy time that is lost due to living with a certain state of illness. A 2014 review showed a considerable variation in methods used to derive disability weights. Since then, several sets of disability weights have been developed. This systematic review aimed to provide an updated and comparative overview of the methodological design choices and surveying techniques that have been used in disability weights measurement studies and how they evolved over time.MethodsA literature search was conducted in multiple international databases (early-1990 to mid-2021). Records were screened according to pre-defined eligibility criteria. The quality of the included disability weights measurement studies was assessed using the Checklist for Reporting Valuation Studies (CREATE) instrument. Studies were collated by characteristics and methodological design approaches. Data extraction was performed by one reviewer and discussed with a second.ResultsForty-six unique disability weights measurement studies met our eligibility criteria. More than half (n = 27; 59%) of the identified studies assessed disability weights for multiple ill-health outcomes. Thirty studies (65%) described the health states using disease-specific descriptions or a combination of a disease-specific descriptions and generic-preference instruments. The percentage of studies obtaining health preferences from a population-based panel increased from 14% (2004-2011) to 32% (2012-2021). None of the disability weight studies published in the past 10 years used the annual profile approach. Most studies performed panel-meetings to obtain disability weights data.ConclusionsOur review reveals that a methodological uniformity between national and GBD disability weights studies increased, especially from 2010 onwards. Over years, more studies used disease-specific health state descriptions in line with those of the GBD study, panel from general populations, and data from web-based surveys and/or household surveys. There is, however, a wide variation in valuation techniques that were used to derive disability weights at national-level and that persisted over time.
| S-EPMC8944058 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are valuable tools in assessing the quality of health care from a patient perspective and are increasingly used by otologists. However, selecting the right questionnaire has proven to be a difficult and time-consuming task. To facilitate this process, we will provide a comprehensive overview of existing questionnaires.MethodsA systematic literature search has been conducted on August 26, 2019, using the EMBASE and PubMed medical databases. 13,345 unique records were extracted. Questionnaires addressing any otologic complaint (tinnitus, hearing loss, earache, otorrhoea, and ear-related pressure sensation, vertigo, itch, or dysgeusia) were identified. All questionnaires were evaluated for eligibility by two independent researchers. Inclusion criteria were adult population, closed-ended questions, English language of the questionnaire, and the availability of the original article describing the development of the instrument or a validation paper describing the validation process written in English.ObjectiveCreate a comprehensive overview of all validated closed-ended otology questionnaires for adults and demonstrate their basic characteristics.Main outcome measureThe number of questionnaires in English literature for the adult population, subdivided per symptom and target population.ResultsA total of 155 unique questionnaires were selected: 33 tinnitus questionnaires, 23 vertigo questionnaires, 84 hearing loss questionnaires, and 15 multiple complaint questionnaires. A protocol for further questionnaire comparison is presented.DiscussionTwo separate sequential searches were needed to identify unique questionnaires and to identify their development/validation paper. Although many ear diseases create multiple symptoms, the majority of the questionnaires were symptom specific.ConclusionMany questionnaires concerning ear-related symptoms exist and predominantly concern hearing loss, vertigo, or tinnitus. Only a few questionnaires cover the multiple complaints that ear diseases can create. The presented overview is the most comprehensive overview of otology questionnaires in literature to date. It will serve as a basis for questionnaire selection by professionals and could serve as a protocol for questionnaire selection in other fields.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42017058155.
| S-EPMC8059288 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUntil now, the use of technology in health care was driven mostly by the assumptions about the benefits of electronic health (eHealth) rather than its evidence. It is noticeable that the magnitude of evidence of effectiveness and efficiency of eHealth is not proportionate to the number of interventions that are regularly conducted. Reliable evidence generated through comprehensive evaluation of eHealth interventions may accelerate the growth of eHealth for long-term successful implementation and help to experience eHealth benefits in an enhanced way.ObjectiveThis study aimed to understand how the evidence of effectiveness and efficiency of eHealth can be generated through evaluation. Hence, we aim to discern (1) how evaluation is conducted in distinct eHealth intervention phases, (2) the aspects of effectiveness and efficiency that are typically evaluated during eHealth interventions, and (3) how eHealth interventions are evaluated in practice.MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted to explore the evaluation methods for eHealth interventions. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. We searched Google Scholar and Scopus for the published papers that addressed the evaluation of eHealth or described an eHealth intervention study. A qualitative analysis of the selected papers was conducted in several steps.ResultsWe intended to see how the process of evaluation unfolds in distinct phases of an eHealth intervention. We revealed that in practice and in several conceptual papers, evaluation is performed at the end of the intervention. There are some studies that discuss the importance of conducting evaluation throughout the intervention; however, in practice, we found no case study that followed this. For our second research question, we discovered aspects of efficiency and effectiveness that are proposed to be assessed during interventions. The aspects that were recurrent in the conceptual papers include clinical, human and social, organizational, technological, cost, ethical and legal, and transferability. However, the case studies reviewed only evaluate the clinical and human and social aspects. At the end of the paper, we discussed a novel approach to look into the evaluation. Our intention was to stir up a discussion around this approach with the hope that it might be able to gather evidence in a comprehensive and credible way.ConclusionsThe importance of evidence in eHealth has not been discussed as rigorously as have the diverse evaluation approaches and evaluation frameworks. Further research directed toward evidence-based evaluation can not only improve the quality of intervention studies but also facilitate successful long-term implementation of eHealth in general. We conclude that the development of more robust and comprehensive evaluation of eHealth studies or an improved validation of evaluation methods could ease the transferability of results among similar studies. Thus, the resources can be used for supplementary research in eHealth.
| S-EPMC6286426 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveShoulder symptoms are common, and imaging is being increasingly used to help with management. However, the relationship between imaging and symptoms remains unclear. This review aims to understand the relationship between imaging-detected pathologies, symptoms, and their persistence.MethodsA systematic review using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, and grey literature was conducted to April 2017. The cross-sectional and longitudinal relationships between imaging-detected abnormalities and symptoms were analyzed and associations qualitatively characterized by a best-evidence synthesis based on study design, covariate adjustment, and the Grade of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Modalities included ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), radiographs, positron emission tomography (PET), bone scintigraphy, and computed tomography.ResultsA total of 6,569 abstracts was screened and 56 articles were included. In total, 50 studies did not adjust for covariates and 36 analyzed individual pathologies only. The majority of studies showed conflicting results. There was no significant association between most imaging features and symptoms among high-quality, cross-sectional studies. There was low-quality evidence that enhancement of the joint capsule on MRI and increased uptake on PET were associated with symptoms in adhesive capsulitis. Based on high-quality longitudinal studies, enlarging rotator cuff tears were associated with an increased incidence of symptoms.ConclusionThere were conflicting results on the association of imaging features with shoulder symptoms and their persistence. The existing evidence was very low in quality, based on the GRADE methodology. Further high-quality studies are required to understand the relationship between imaging and shoulder symptoms and to determine the appropriate role of imaging in care pathways.
| S-EPMC6099421 | biostudies-literature