Constant-Murley Score: systematic review and standardized evaluation in different shoulder pathologies.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Vrotsou K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6132990 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe Constant-Murley Score (CMS) is a relatively unique shoulder assessment tool because it combines patient-reported outcomes (pain and activity), performance measurement and clinician-reported outcomes (strength and mobility). With these characteristics, the effect of patient-related psychological factors on the CMS remains debated. We aimed to investigate which parameters of the CMS are influenced by psychological factors by assessing the CMS before and after rehabilitation for chronic shoulder pain.MethodsThis retrospective study screened all patients (18-65 years old) who were admitted for interdisciplinary rehabilitation for chronic shoulder pain (≥ 3 months) between May 2012 and December 2017. Patients with unilateral shoulder injuries were eligible. Exclusion criteria were shoulder instability, concomitant neurological injuries, complex regional pain syndrome (including Steinbrocker syndrome), heavy psychiatric issues, and missing data. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Pain Catastrophizing scale, and Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia were administered before and after treatment. Regression models were used to estimate associations between psychological factors and the CMS.ResultsWe included 433 patients (88% male, mean age 47±11 years) with a median duration of symptoms of 392.2 days (interquartile range: 266.5-583.5). Rotator cuff issue was present in 71% of patients. During interdisciplinary rehabilitation, patients were followed for a mean of 33.6±7.5 days. The mean CMS at entry was 42.8 ±15.5. The mean gain in CMS after treatment was 10.6 ±10.9. Before treatment, psychological factors were significantly associated with only the pain CMS parameter: -0.37 (95% CI: -0.46 to -0.28), p <0.001. After treatment, psychological factors were associated with the evolution of the four CMS parameters: -0.12 (-0.23 to -0.01) to -0.26 (95% CI: -0.36 to -0.16), p<0.05.ConclusionsThis study raises the question of a distinct assessment of pain when assessing shoulder function with CMS in patients with chronic shoulder pain. The separation of the "pain parameter" from the overall CMS score seems illusory with this tool that is used worldwide. However, clinicians should be aware that psychological factors can negatively influence the evolution of all CMS parameters during follow-up, which argues for a biopsychosocial approach to patients with chronic shoulder pain.
| S-EPMC10197235 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo assess the interchangeability of various existing answering scales within the subjective part of the Constant-Murley Score (CMS) and to determine the effect of the different answering scales on the inter- and intraobserver reliability.MethodsIn this prospective, single-center, cross-sectional trial, patients with shoulder problems were included from June to September 2018. Subjects recruited were 18 years or older, presented various shoulder complaints, e.g., diagnosis of osteoarthritis, subacromial pain syndrome, rotator cuff or biceps tendon problems, or frozen shoulder. An extended version of the CMS was prepared including the same questions multiple times but with varying answer scales. Six versions were made with random order of the questions. The answering scales were a verbal and paper based visual analog scale (VAS), smiley face scale, Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), and categories. Internal consistency of the various CMS, Spearman correlation coefficients, intraobserver, and interobserver agreement was assessed (ICC).ResultsIn total, 93 patients were included. The total CMS using the paper-based VAS, smiley face score, and NRS were 46.9 ± 19.4, 45.2 ± 18.5, and 45.0 ± 18.7. Correlations of the total scores of the different versions varied from 0.98 to 0.99. CMS-category versus CMS-smiley face score and CMS-category versus CMS-NRS pain were significantly different (P = .02 and P = .01). Good internal consistency (0.76-0.79) and acceptable inter- and intraobserver reliability were found (ICC: 0.89-0.97, 0.98-0.99; P < .001).ConclusionsThe different answering scales for the subjective subscales within the CMS for pain, work, and recreational activity were not interchangeable on item level and significantly influenced the total CMS score. Differences were below the smallest detectable change and interpreted as not clinically relevant. Particularly on item level, data from different studies cannot be pooled and compared when different answering scales are being used. The inter- and intraobserver reliability were excellent.Level of evidenceLevel I, prospective cross-sectional study.
| S-EPMC8129441 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionShoulder pain is a major disorder of the musculoskeletal system. To the best of our knowledge, there is no documentation of an Arabic version of the shoulder disability and pain measurements. Constant Murley Score (CMS) is one of the standard questionnaires for clinical practice and research. The aim of this research centred around the evaluation of the Arabic Constant Murley Score and subsequently assessing the reliability and validity in comparison to disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH).MethodsHundred and twenty five patients took part in this research. We did the internal consistency tests with Cronbach's alpha. Intra-correlation coefficient, convergent validity, convergent construct validity, responsiveness, and floor and ceiling effects were also calculated.ResultsPrincipal component analysis showed that the variance was 63.31% with a factor range of 0.42-0.85, which fulfils the uni-dimensionality criterion. Also, the Arabic CMS correlated negatively with the DASH score (-0.82, p < 0.001). The Arabic version of CMS was consistent with Cronbach's alpha of 0.74. With Inter Class Correlation Coefficient (ICC) = 0.83 it also showed a very good test-retest reliability.ConclusionOurs is the first translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the CMS into Arabic. Important evidences of validity were tested such as uni-dimensionality, convergent validity, and internal consistency. Results demonstrate an acceptable Cronbach's alpha of 0.74, ICC = 0.830 indicating excellent reliability and a strong correlation of the Arabic CMS with the DASH score (r = -0.820). Overall, the Arabic version of CMS is a good and reliable diagnostic tool for patients experiencing shoulder pain.
| S-EPMC7680506 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purpose - Most newer randomized studies examining plate fixation and nonoperative treatment of midshaft clavicular fractures utilize both Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and Constant-Murley score (CS) in the evaluation of patient outcomes. Compared with DASH, the use of CS requires on-site trained personnel and patient visits to obtain the score. The use of both DASH and CS should provide extra value compared with the use of a single functional outcome score; if this value is not provided, the combined use is not necessary. We evaluated the agreement between DASH and CS in patients with displaced midshaft clavicular fractures.Patients and methods - We used prospectively collected data from 146 patients enrolled in a randomized study comparing operative and nonoperative treatment of midshaft clavicular fractures. We determined correlation between DASH and CS at all follow-up points and calculated mean bias in the Bland-Altman plot.Results - We found moderate to high correlation (from 0.82 at 6 weeks' follow-up to 0.58 at 1-year follow-up) between DASH and CS score, and a small bias (2.21 [95% CI 0.22-4.20]) in the Bland-Altman plot.Interpretation - In patients with displaced midshaft clavicular fractures DASH and CS measures the same degree of disability. Unless specifically studying strength and range of motion, we recommend the sole use of DASH as it would eliminate potential observer-induced bias along with removing the economic and logistic burden of obtaining CS without compromising the value of the collected data.
| S-EPMC9897629 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe results of clinical trials should be assessed for both statistical significance and importance of observed effects to patients. Minimal important difference (MID) is a threshold denoting a difference that is important to patients. Patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) is a threshold above which patients feel well.ObjectiveTo determine MID and PASS for common outcome instruments in patients with subacromial pain syndrome (SAPS).MethodsWe used data from the FIMPACT trial, a randomised controlled trial of treatment for SAPS that included 193 patients. The outcomes were shoulder pain at rest and on arm activity, both measured with the 0-100?mm visual analogue scale (VAS), the Constant-Murley score (CS), and the Simple Shoulder Test (SST). The transition question was a five-point global rating of change. We used three anchor-based methods to determine the MID for improvement: the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, the mean difference of change and the mean change methods. For the PASS, we used the ROC and 75th percentile methods and calculated estimates using two different anchor question thresholds.ResultsDifferent MID methods yielded different estimates. The ROC method yielded the smallest estimates for MID: 20?mm for shoulder pain on arm activity, 10 points for CS and 1.5 points for SST, with good to excellent discrimination (areas under curve (AUCs) from 0.86 to 0.94). We could not establish a reliable MID for pain at rest. The PASS estimates were consistent between methods. The ROC method PASS thresholds using a conservative anchor question threshold were 2?mm for pain at rest, 9?mm for pain on activity, 80 points for CS and 11 points for SST, with AUCs from 0.74 to 0.83.ConclusionWe recommend the smallest estimate from different methods as the MID, because it is very unlikely that changes smaller than the smallest MID estimate are important to patients: 20?mm for pain VAS on arm activity, 10 points for CS and 1.5 points for SST. We recommend PASS estimates of 9?mm for pain on arm activity, 80 points for CS, and 11 points for SST.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00428870 (first registered January 29, 2007).
| S-EPMC7937213 | 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
Project description:ObjectiveTo identify all available shoulder disability questionnaires designed to measure physical functioning and to evaluate evidence for the clinimetric quality of these instruments.MethodsSystematic 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.ResultsTwo 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.ConclusionThe 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.
| S-EPMC1754942 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is no consensus on the optimal treatment for mid-shaft clavicular fracture. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of non-operative treatment, plate fixation, and intramedullary pin fixation in terms of the Constant-Murley Score (CMS) for treatment of mid-shaft clavicular fracture. Comprehensive search of the Embase, Cochrane Library and PubMed was conducted to retrieve relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A random-effect network meta-analysis was conducted within a Bayesian framework using Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) in OpenBUGS 3.2.2. Differences in CMS among the three treatments analyzed were evaluated with weighted mean difference (WMD) and surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA). Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in our network meta-analysis. Our results revealed that in terms of CMS followed-up for six months, the efficacies of plate fixation and intramedullary pin fixation were higher than non-operative treatment (plate fixation: WMD = 4.70, 95% CI = 1.21 ∼ 7.83; intramedullary pin fixation: WMD = 6.71, 95% CI = 3.20 ∼ 10.39), and intramedullary pin fixation had better efficacy than plate fixation, had better efficacy. However, no differences were found between the efficacies of the three treatments in pairwise comparisons with respect to CMS followed-up for six weeks, three months, 12 months and 24 months. In addition, the cluster analysis showed that intramedullary pin fixation had the best efficacy for patients with mid-shaft CF, followed by plate fixation and non-operative treatment. These analyses suggest intramedullary pin fixation may be the optimal therapeutic approach for mid-shaft clavicular fracture patients.
| S-EPMC5669965 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To investigate the association and the exposure-response relationship between work above shoulder height and shoulder pain or disorders. METHODS:A systematic search was performed in Medline, Embase, and Health and Safety Science Abstracts. Included were articles with prospective cohort, case-control, cross-sectional, or intervention study designs. Quality assessment was based on an evaluation scheme adjusted to study design and normalized to 100%. The cut-off for sufficient quality to include articles was above 40% and cut-off for high-quality articles was above 50% of maximal score. The level of strength of evidence for an association between exposure and effect was assessed according to the GRADE guidelines. RESULTS:Thirty-four articles were included. Articles that document large effects (higher risk estimates; OR???2) have higher quality score, include analyses of severe arm elevation, more often use clinical outcome, and report an exposure-response relationship compared to studies reporting lower risk estimates. The studies that reported large effects were all significant. An exposure-response relationship was found in many high-quality studies when relating exposure intensity of arm elevation (level of arm elevation, amplitude) as well as duration of arm elevation, especially?>?90°. CONCLUSION:We conclude on a limited evidence for an association between arm elevation at work and shoulder disorders. Severe arm elevation with elbows above shoulder level (i.e.,?>?90°) shows a moderate evidence for an association with shoulder disorders.
| S-EPMC7519900 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess and characterize the correlation between shoulder pathologies and sleep disturbances.MethodsParticipants enrolled into this case-control study were divided into two groups: patients with an established clinical diagnosis of active shoulder pathology (study group), and patients without any shoulder pathology (control group). All patients completed the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) questionnaire, in addition to questions related to participant demographics, health status, medication, and other known insomnia risk factors.ResultsA total of 98 patients were included (46 in the study group and 52 controls). Mean ISI score was significantly higher (indicating more severe insomnia) in the study group versus control group (t[96] = -9.67), even after correcting for confounders (t[53.1] = -8.61). Additionally, in patients with shoulder pathology, those with comorbidities experienced more sleep disturbances than those without comorbidities (β = 0.36). Lastly, the shoulder pathology group was at a higher risk of having sleep disturbances compared with controls (relative risk 4.86, 95% confidence interval 2.24, 10.55).ConclusionsSleep disturbances are more common among patients with shoulder pathologies. Comorbidities and a shorter duration of pathology may predict more severe sleep disturbances.
| S-EPMC9189537 | biostudies-literature