Does the outcome of diagnostic ultrasound influence the treatment modalities and recovery in patients with shoulder pain in physiotherapy practice? Results from a prospective cohort study

Yasmaine Helga Jacques Marie Karel, Audilia Miranda, Marloes Thoomes-de Graaf, Gwendolijne GM Scholten-Peeters, Ramon PG Ottenheijm, Bart W. Koes, Arianne P. Verhagen

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Study design: Prospective cohort study including patients with shoulder pain in primary care physiotherapy. Background: There is an increased tendency to use diagnostic ultrasound to aid the diagnostic strategy and target treatment. It is a relatively cheap and accessible imaging technique but the implications for practice and patients are unknown. Objectives: To study the influence of diagnostic ultrasound (DUS) on diagnostic work-up, treatment modalities and recovery. Methods: Participants (n = 389) with a new episode of shoulder pain were assessed at baseline and followed for 6, 12 and 26 weeks. Diagnostic work-up, including the use of DUS, and treatment strategies were reported by the therapists at 3, 6 and 12 weeks. Results: Most patients (41%) were diagnosed with subacromial impingement/pain syndrome after physical examination or DUS. DUS was used in 31% of the participants. Tendinopathy was the most found abnormality in this sub-population. Patients who underwent DUS were more frequently treated using exercise therapy. Patients that not had DUS were more likely to receive massage therapy, trigger point therapy or mobilisation techniques. Logistic regression analyses did not show a significant association between DUS and recovery after 26 weeks (0.88, 95%CI:0.50–1.57). Correcting for the therapist as a confounder using a multilevel binary logistic regression did not show a significant cluster effect. Conclusion: Diagnostic US as a work-up component does not seem to influence diagnosis or recovery but does influence the choice of treatment modality. Conclusions are limited to observational data. High quality randomized trials should study the effect of DUS on recovery.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)28-35
Number of pages8
JournalMusculoskeletal Science and Practice
Volume41
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2019

Fingerprint

Shoulder Pain
Ultrasonography
Cohort Studies
Prospective Studies
Therapeutics
Shoulder Impingement Syndrome
Logistic Models
Trigger Points
Exercise Therapy
Tendinopathy
Massage
Physical Examination
Primary Health Care
Regression Analysis
Pain

Keywords

  • Diagnostic tool
  • Diagnostic ultrasound
  • Musculoskeletal conditions
  • Musculoskeletal ultrasound
  • Physical therapist

Cite this

Karel, Yasmaine Helga Jacques Marie ; Miranda, Audilia ; Thoomes-de Graaf, Marloes ; Scholten-Peeters, Gwendolijne GM ; Ottenheijm, Ramon PG ; Koes, Bart W. ; Verhagen, Arianne P. / Does the outcome of diagnostic ultrasound influence the treatment modalities and recovery in patients with shoulder pain in physiotherapy practice? Results from a prospective cohort study. In: Musculoskeletal Science and Practice. 2019 ; Vol. 41. pp. 28-35.
@article{492ca57628a3438d9d53d7aaf1d113fc,
title = "Does the outcome of diagnostic ultrasound influence the treatment modalities and recovery in patients with shoulder pain in physiotherapy practice? Results from a prospective cohort study",
abstract = "Study design: Prospective cohort study including patients with shoulder pain in primary care physiotherapy. Background: There is an increased tendency to use diagnostic ultrasound to aid the diagnostic strategy and target treatment. It is a relatively cheap and accessible imaging technique but the implications for practice and patients are unknown. Objectives: To study the influence of diagnostic ultrasound (DUS) on diagnostic work-up, treatment modalities and recovery. Methods: Participants (n = 389) with a new episode of shoulder pain were assessed at baseline and followed for 6, 12 and 26 weeks. Diagnostic work-up, including the use of DUS, and treatment strategies were reported by the therapists at 3, 6 and 12 weeks. Results: Most patients (41{\%}) were diagnosed with subacromial impingement/pain syndrome after physical examination or DUS. DUS was used in 31{\%} of the participants. Tendinopathy was the most found abnormality in this sub-population. Patients who underwent DUS were more frequently treated using exercise therapy. Patients that not had DUS were more likely to receive massage therapy, trigger point therapy or mobilisation techniques. Logistic regression analyses did not show a significant association between DUS and recovery after 26 weeks (0.88, 95{\%}CI:0.50–1.57). Correcting for the therapist as a confounder using a multilevel binary logistic regression did not show a significant cluster effect. Conclusion: Diagnostic US as a work-up component does not seem to influence diagnosis or recovery but does influence the choice of treatment modality. Conclusions are limited to observational data. High quality randomized trials should study the effect of DUS on recovery.",
keywords = "Diagnostic tool, Diagnostic ultrasound, Musculoskeletal conditions, Musculoskeletal ultrasound, Physical therapist",
author = "Karel, {Yasmaine Helga Jacques Marie} and Audilia Miranda and {Thoomes-de Graaf}, Marloes and Scholten-Peeters, {Gwendolijne GM} and Ottenheijm, {Ramon PG} and Koes, {Bart W.} and Verhagen, {Arianne P.}",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.msksp.2019.03.003",
language = "English",
volume = "41",
pages = "28--35",
journal = "Musculoskeletal science & practice",
issn = "2468-7812",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

Does the outcome of diagnostic ultrasound influence the treatment modalities and recovery in patients with shoulder pain in physiotherapy practice? Results from a prospective cohort study. / Karel, Yasmaine Helga Jacques Marie; Miranda, Audilia; Thoomes-de Graaf, Marloes; Scholten-Peeters, Gwendolijne GM; Ottenheijm, Ramon PG; Koes, Bart W.; Verhagen, Arianne P.

In: Musculoskeletal Science and Practice, Vol. 41, 01.06.2019, p. 28-35.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does the outcome of diagnostic ultrasound influence the treatment modalities and recovery in patients with shoulder pain in physiotherapy practice? Results from a prospective cohort study

AU - Karel, Yasmaine Helga Jacques Marie

AU - Miranda, Audilia

AU - Thoomes-de Graaf, Marloes

AU - Scholten-Peeters, Gwendolijne GM

AU - Ottenheijm, Ramon PG

AU - Koes, Bart W.

AU - Verhagen, Arianne P.

PY - 2019/6/1

Y1 - 2019/6/1

N2 - Study design: Prospective cohort study including patients with shoulder pain in primary care physiotherapy. Background: There is an increased tendency to use diagnostic ultrasound to aid the diagnostic strategy and target treatment. It is a relatively cheap and accessible imaging technique but the implications for practice and patients are unknown. Objectives: To study the influence of diagnostic ultrasound (DUS) on diagnostic work-up, treatment modalities and recovery. Methods: Participants (n = 389) with a new episode of shoulder pain were assessed at baseline and followed for 6, 12 and 26 weeks. Diagnostic work-up, including the use of DUS, and treatment strategies were reported by the therapists at 3, 6 and 12 weeks. Results: Most patients (41%) were diagnosed with subacromial impingement/pain syndrome after physical examination or DUS. DUS was used in 31% of the participants. Tendinopathy was the most found abnormality in this sub-population. Patients who underwent DUS were more frequently treated using exercise therapy. Patients that not had DUS were more likely to receive massage therapy, trigger point therapy or mobilisation techniques. Logistic regression analyses did not show a significant association between DUS and recovery after 26 weeks (0.88, 95%CI:0.50–1.57). Correcting for the therapist as a confounder using a multilevel binary logistic regression did not show a significant cluster effect. Conclusion: Diagnostic US as a work-up component does not seem to influence diagnosis or recovery but does influence the choice of treatment modality. Conclusions are limited to observational data. High quality randomized trials should study the effect of DUS on recovery.

AB - Study design: Prospective cohort study including patients with shoulder pain in primary care physiotherapy. Background: There is an increased tendency to use diagnostic ultrasound to aid the diagnostic strategy and target treatment. It is a relatively cheap and accessible imaging technique but the implications for practice and patients are unknown. Objectives: To study the influence of diagnostic ultrasound (DUS) on diagnostic work-up, treatment modalities and recovery. Methods: Participants (n = 389) with a new episode of shoulder pain were assessed at baseline and followed for 6, 12 and 26 weeks. Diagnostic work-up, including the use of DUS, and treatment strategies were reported by the therapists at 3, 6 and 12 weeks. Results: Most patients (41%) were diagnosed with subacromial impingement/pain syndrome after physical examination or DUS. DUS was used in 31% of the participants. Tendinopathy was the most found abnormality in this sub-population. Patients who underwent DUS were more frequently treated using exercise therapy. Patients that not had DUS were more likely to receive massage therapy, trigger point therapy or mobilisation techniques. Logistic regression analyses did not show a significant association between DUS and recovery after 26 weeks (0.88, 95%CI:0.50–1.57). Correcting for the therapist as a confounder using a multilevel binary logistic regression did not show a significant cluster effect. Conclusion: Diagnostic US as a work-up component does not seem to influence diagnosis or recovery but does influence the choice of treatment modality. Conclusions are limited to observational data. High quality randomized trials should study the effect of DUS on recovery.

KW - Diagnostic tool

KW - Diagnostic ultrasound

KW - Musculoskeletal conditions

KW - Musculoskeletal ultrasound

KW - Physical therapist

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85063094581&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85063094581&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.msksp.2019.03.003

DO - 10.1016/j.msksp.2019.03.003

M3 - Article

VL - 41

SP - 28

EP - 35

JO - Musculoskeletal science & practice

JF - Musculoskeletal science & practice

SN - 2468-7812

ER -