The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery

The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, Volume 91, Issue Supplement 6

Scientific Exhibits | November 01, 2009

Examination of the Shoulder: The Past, the Present, and the Future

Xiaofeng Jia, MD, PhD¹; Steve A. Petersen, MD¹; Abtin H. Khosravi, MS¹; Venkat Almareddi, MD¹; Vinodhkumar Pannirselvam, MD¹; Edward G. McFarland, MD¹

¹ c/o Elaine P. Henze, BJ, ELS, Medical Editor and Director, Editorial Services, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, 4940 Eastern Avenue, #A665, Baltimore, MD 21224-2780. E-mail address for E.P. Henze: ehenze1@jhmi.edu

View Disclosures and Other Information

Disclosure: The authors did not receive any outside funding or grants in support of their research for or preparation of this work. Neither they nor a member of their immediate families received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity.

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.

J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2009 Nov 01;91(Supplement 6):10-18. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.I.00534

5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Article

Comments (0)

text A A A

Extract

The examination of the shoulder complex is a challenge for many practitioners. For any musculoskeletal condition, especially one that is associated with the shoulder joint, it is important to obtain a thorough history and physical examination, both of which are essential to reaching a diagnosis. For many disease entities, a diagnosis can often be accurately reached without the use of imaging studies. However, when imaging studies are mandated and available, the pertinent history and the findings from the physical examination should be integrated with those studies for the purpose of reaching an accurate diagnosis that allows effective treatment, whether nonoperative or surgical. In addition, subjective information from the patient (such as the occurrence of night pain or pain only with motion) and information gained from objective measures during the physical examination facilitate both the pretreatment assessment and the outcome evaluation.

Figures in this Article

Introduction

In 1934, in his classic book The Shoulder, Codman¹ was the first to specifically address conditions that affect the shoulder joint. Within the book, he provided a table to help clinicians distinguish various shoulder conditions based on the pertinent history and the findings on physical examination. That table (Fig. 1) is still clinically relevant today. Since that time, however, many changes have occurred in the appreciation of disease states that affect the shoulder and in the identification of their associated pathophysiology and physical findings. The clinician's armamentarium with regard to patient history and physical examination findings has also expanded, and these tools help the clinician to arrive at an accurate diagnosis and an effective treatment plan.

View Large | Download Slide(.ppt)
Add to My JBJS

Fig. 1: Codman's table of shoulder abnormalities. Key: The numbers below the diagnoses refer to the pages on which the lesions are described; those in the vertical column, next to the list of diagnostic points, refer to the pages on which these points are explained. Thus the student, when using the chart, may readily obtain more information about dubious points. To use the chart to summarize the symptom-complex of any clinical entity, make separate lists of diagnostic points for each form or symbol in the vertical column under that entity, then write after each list as follows:
? = (list) "are of positive importance in this diagnosis."
+ = (list) "are of positive importance, but not in all stages or in all cases."
± = (list) "are sometimes present but are often absent."
? = (list) "the presence of these would be contradictory to this diagnosis, so that their absence is important."
= (list) "are usually not present, but their presence is not important."
? = (list) "the author has no opinion."
(Reprinted from: Codman EA. The shoulder. Rupture of the supraspinatus tendon and other lesions in or about the subacromial bursa. Boston: Thomas Todd; 1934; with permission from Krieger Publishing Company.)

The main goal of our investigation was to contrast our current evidence-based knowledge of shoulder examination with the observations made by Codman¹. Specifically, our goals were: (1) to review the current literature on specific disease states of the shoulder as they relate to the relevant history and physical examination, (2) to provide a summary of the clinical usefulness of the history and the physical examination findings for these conditions, (3) to review our experience with physical examination of the shoulder, (4) to create a modern version of Codman's table with use of current statistical methods, and (5) to speculate on the future roles of history and physical examination in the diagnosis and treatment of shoulder conditions.

Materials and Methods

Data Collection

In 1995, we began entering the information of patients who were undergoing shoulder surgery at our institution into a database that was designed to allow us to study preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data. (For our current study, we focused on the data gained from the patient's history and preoperative physical examination findings and how that data compared with the surgical findings^2-8.) All patients completed subjective outcome instruments, including the Short Form-36 (SF-36)⁹, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder scale¹⁰, the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder scale¹¹, and the L'Insalata shoulder questionnaire^9,12. Each patient then underwent a thorough physical examination either by the senior author (E.G.M.) or under his direct supervision⁸. This examination included range-of-motion measurements, strength testing, and provocative tests to elicit specific findings for specific diagnoses. All preoperative data were entered into the database.

The patients subsequently underwent surgery of the shoulder by the senior author, but not all had arthroscopic shoulder evaluations. For those who did, a data sheet was used to record the findings, and all intraoperative data were subsequently entered into the database.

For the current study, we reviewed the preoperative and intraoperative data of patients who were treated within the time period of April 1995 through July 2008, and we report on all 1913 patients whose records were found to be complete.

Diagnoses Analyzed

We studied the following diagnoses: rotator cuff disease (tendinosis or bursitis, partial-thickness tear, full-thickness tear, and subscapularis tear), acromioclavicular joint abnormalities, shoulder instability (anterior, posterior, and multidirectional), anterior and posterior lesions of the superior labrum, and biceps tendon tears. For all patients, range-of-motion measurements were obtained with a hand-held goniometer with use of standard techniques: active abduction, active external rotation with the arm abducted to 90°, active internal rotation with the arm abducted to 90°, and active external rotation with the arm at the side¹³.

We used the following diagnostic tests: the drop-arm sign⁴, the shoulder shrug sign⁷, the Neer impingement sign¹⁴, the Hawkins-Kennedy impingement sign¹⁵, the Speed test¹⁶, the anterior apprehension test¹⁷, the posterior apprehension test¹⁸, the active compression test¹⁹, the anterior slide test²⁰, the lift-off test²¹, the anterior drawer test²², the posterior drawer test²², the painful arc sign²³, the cross-body adduction test²⁴, the acromioclavicular resisted extension test², the Whipple test²⁵, and the external rotation lag sign²⁶.

Statistical Analysis

For the current study, we analyzed the data to evaluate the clinical usefulness of history and physical examination factors in determining various shoulder diagnoses. For this study, we performed sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio calculations only.

Source of Funding

There was no external funding source for this paper.

Results

Tables I through V present the signs and the test results of the 1913 patients from our database. Summary tables from our literature review with regard to these various disclosures are presented in the Appendix.

View Larger

TABLE I Physical Examination Signs and Tests for the Shoulder from Our Database (Part A)*

	Range of Motion (deg)							Drop-Arm Sign			Shoulder Shrug Sign
Diagnosis	ABD	90° ER	90° IR	ER Side	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR
Rotator cuff	130.10	79.00	41.10	46.60	73.60	65.80	2.15	95.60	52.80	2.03
Tendinosis/bursitis	139.80	83.40	42.70	48.80	13.60	77.30	0.60	33.30	47.20	0.63
Partial-thickness tear	137.60	80.90	38.90	47.30	14.30	77.50	0.64	43.20	47.90	0.83
Full-thickness tear	126.60	78.20	40.80	46.80	34.90	87.50	2.79	62.10	52.60	1.31
Massive tear	108.20	65.10	36.00	37.50	43.80	82.30	2.48	74.50	49.80	1.49
Glenohumeral arthritis	86.30	49.30	14.40	22.00	22.10	81.80	1.22	90.50	56.80	2.10
Adhesive capsulitis	87.40	46.70	11.80	18.30	23.30	81.20	1.24	94.70	49.50	1.88
Glenohumeral instability	151.20	91.20	53.00	57.00	9.20	78.70	0.43	17.20	38.80	0.28
Anterior	152.00	90.10	51.80	55.40	9.00	79.50	0.44	19.90	37.40	0.32
Posterior	145.10	89.40	61.40	60.90	5.60	80.80	0.29	16.10	42.20	0.28
Multidirectional	153.00	102.10	55.00	67.50	4.50	80.90	0.24	9.50	42.40	0.17
SLAP lesions	146.50	93.40	55.60	53.50	5.60	80.80	0.29	24.00	48.00	0.46
Biceps disease	124.20	77.50	41.70	39.20	0.00	81.00	0.00	0.40	99.50	0.76
AC joint arthritis	139.20	85.00	41.90	49.90	12.10	80.60	0.62	27.90	47.10	0.53

Because the data in some cells represent subgroups of patients, not all denominators equal 1913 patients; ABD = active abduction; ER = active external rotation with arm abducted 90°; IR = active internal rotation with arm abducted 90°; ER Side = active external rotation, arm at side; S = sensitivity; Sp = specificity; LR = likelihood ratio; SLAP = superior labrum anterior and posterior; and AC = acromioclavicular.

Add to My JBJS

TABLE I Physical Examination Signs and Tests for the Shoulder from Our Database (Part A)*

	Range of Motion (deg)							Drop-Arm Sign			Shoulder Shrug Sign
Diagnosis	ABD	90° ER	90° IR	ER Side	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR
Rotator cuff	130.10	79.00	41.10	46.60	73.60	65.80	2.15	95.60	52.80	2.03
Tendinosis/bursitis	139.80	83.40	42.70	48.80	13.60	77.30	0.60	33.30	47.20	0.63
Partial-thickness tear	137.60	80.90	38.90	47.30	14.30	77.50	0.64	43.20	47.90	0.83
Full-thickness tear	126.60	78.20	40.80	46.80	34.90	87.50	2.79	62.10	52.60	1.31
Massive tear	108.20	65.10	36.00	37.50	43.80	82.30	2.48	74.50	49.80	1.49
Glenohumeral arthritis	86.30	49.30	14.40	22.00	22.10	81.80	1.22	90.50	56.80	2.10
Adhesive capsulitis	87.40	46.70	11.80	18.30	23.30	81.20	1.24	94.70	49.50	1.88
Glenohumeral instability	151.20	91.20	53.00	57.00	9.20	78.70	0.43	17.20	38.80	0.28
Anterior	152.00	90.10	51.80	55.40	9.00	79.50	0.44	19.90	37.40	0.32
Posterior	145.10	89.40	61.40	60.90	5.60	80.80	0.29	16.10	42.20	0.28
Multidirectional	153.00	102.10	55.00	67.50	4.50	80.90	0.24	9.50	42.40	0.17
SLAP lesions	146.50	93.40	55.60	53.50	5.60	80.80	0.29	24.00	48.00	0.46
Biceps disease	124.20	77.50	41.70	39.20	0.00	81.00	0.00	0.40	99.50	0.76
AC joint arthritis	139.20	85.00	41.90	49.90	12.10	80.60	0.62	27.90	47.10	0.53

View Larger

TABLE II Physical Examination Signs and Tests for the Shoulder from Our Database (Part B)*

	Neer Impingement Sign					Hawkins-Kennedy Sign				Speed Test
Diagnosis	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR
Rotator cuff	63.70	43.40	1.12	71.2	41.8	1.22	47.3	62.8	1.27
Tendinosis/bursitis	85.70	49.20	1.69	75.7	44.5	1.36	33.3	69.8	1.10
Partial-thickness tear	75.40	47.50	1.44	75.4	44.4	1.36	33.3	70.6	1.13
Full-thickness tear	59.30	47.20	1.12	68.7	48.3	1.33	39.9	75.3	1.62
Massive tear	62.50	59.90	1.56	64.4	35.6	1.00	52.1	58.5	1.25
Glenohumeral arthritis	36.70	61.40	0.95	77.7	38.5	1.26	52.5	60.5	1.33
Adhesive capsulitis	39.80	65.70	1.16	60.4	35.4	0.94	26.3	57.6	0.62
Glenohumeral instability	60.50	30.70	0.87	37.9	28.8	0.53	22.4	53.1	0.48
Anterior	58.00	34.70	0.89	33.1	30.5	0.48	18.0	54.2	0.39
Posterior	50.90	27.70	0.70	41.0	35.0	0.63	33.3	57.8	0.79
Multidirectional	59.00	18.30	0.72	50.0	35.3	0.77	25.9	57.7	0.61
SLAP lesions	38.50	33.30	0.58	42.1	35.1	0.65	52.8	58.3	1.26
Biceps disease	64.00	41.00	1.09	55.0	38.0	0.89	50.0	67.0	1.51
AC joint arthritis	57.00	41.00	0.78	47.0	45.0	0.85	24.0	71.0	0.83

Because the data in some cells represent subgroups of patients, not all denominators equal 1913 patients; S = sensitivity; Sp = specificity; LR = likelihood ratio; SLAP = superior labrum anterior and posterior; and AC = acromioclavicular.

Add to My JBJS

TABLE II Physical Examination Signs and Tests for the Shoulder from Our Database (Part B)*

	Neer Impingement Sign					Hawkins-Kennedy Sign				Speed Test
Diagnosis	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR
Rotator cuff	63.70	43.40	1.12	71.2	41.8	1.22	47.3	62.8	1.27
Tendinosis/bursitis	85.70	49.20	1.69	75.7	44.5	1.36	33.3	69.8	1.10
Partial-thickness tear	75.40	47.50	1.44	75.4	44.4	1.36	33.3	70.6	1.13
Full-thickness tear	59.30	47.20	1.12	68.7	48.3	1.33	39.9	75.3	1.62
Massive tear	62.50	59.90	1.56	64.4	35.6	1.00	52.1	58.5	1.25
Glenohumeral arthritis	36.70	61.40	0.95	77.7	38.5	1.26	52.5	60.5	1.33
Adhesive capsulitis	39.80	65.70	1.16	60.4	35.4	0.94	26.3	57.6	0.62
Glenohumeral instability	60.50	30.70	0.87	37.9	28.8	0.53	22.4	53.1	0.48
Anterior	58.00	34.70	0.89	33.1	30.5	0.48	18.0	54.2	0.39
Posterior	50.90	27.70	0.70	41.0	35.0	0.63	33.3	57.8	0.79
Multidirectional	59.00	18.30	0.72	50.0	35.3	0.77	25.9	57.7	0.61
SLAP lesions	38.50	33.30	0.58	42.1	35.1	0.65	52.8	58.3	1.26
Biceps disease	64.00	41.00	1.09	55.0	38.0	0.89	50.0	67.0	1.51
AC joint arthritis	57.00	41.00	0.78	47.0	45.0	0.85	24.0	71.0	0.83

View Larger

TABLE III Physical Examination Signs and Tests for the Shoulder from Our Database (Part C)*

	Anterior Apprehension Test					Posterior Apprehension Test				Active Compression Test
Diagnosis	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR
Rotator cuff	4.3	74.2	0.17	0.2	97.7	0.10	68.2	41.7	1.17
Tendinosis/bursitis	6.5	83.8	0.40	0.0	98.7	0.00	61.3	36.7	0.97
Partial-thickness tear	8.0	83.8	0.49	0.0	98.6	0.00	69.8	37.5	1.12
Full-thickness tear	2.4	80.6	0.12	0.0	98.3	0.00	67.8	38.4	1.10
Massive tear	2.8	84.0	0.17	0.0	98.6	0.00	73.0	37.4	1.17
Glenohumeral arthritis	3.2	82.0	0.18	0.9	98.6	0.67	66.1	37.6	1.06
Adhesive capsulitis	4.8	84.3	0.30	0.0	98.7	0.00	53.3	36.7	0.84
Glenohumeral instability	58.1	95.7	13.67	5.6	99.6	14.53	43.8	32.0	0.64
Anterior	72.0	96.0	20.22	3.4	99.0	3.53	39.5	33.1	0.59
Posterior	20.0	84.7	1.31	19.2	99.2	24.97	71.0	37.0	1.13
Multidirectional	42.9	85.1	2.87	17.6	33.5	0.26	41.7	36.5	0.66
SLAP lesions	2.8	84.3	0.18	3.0	98.8	2.48	47.0	55.0	1.04
Biceps disease	0.0	84.5	0.00	0.0	98.7	0.00	68.0	46.0	1.24
AC joint arthritis	4.1	83.7	0.25	0.0	98.6	0.00	41.0	95.0	8.20

Add to My JBJS

TABLE III Physical Examination Signs and Tests for the Shoulder from Our Database (Part C)*

	Anterior Apprehension Test					Posterior Apprehension Test				Active Compression Test
Diagnosis	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR
Rotator cuff	4.3	74.2	0.17	0.2	97.7	0.10	68.2	41.7	1.17
Tendinosis/bursitis	6.5	83.8	0.40	0.0	98.7	0.00	61.3	36.7	0.97
Partial-thickness tear	8.0	83.8	0.49	0.0	98.6	0.00	69.8	37.5	1.12
Full-thickness tear	2.4	80.6	0.12	0.0	98.3	0.00	67.8	38.4	1.10
Massive tear	2.8	84.0	0.17	0.0	98.6	0.00	73.0	37.4	1.17
Glenohumeral arthritis	3.2	82.0	0.18	0.9	98.6	0.67	66.1	37.6	1.06
Adhesive capsulitis	4.8	84.3	0.30	0.0	98.7	0.00	53.3	36.7	0.84
Glenohumeral instability	58.1	95.7	13.67	5.6	99.6	14.53	43.8	32.0	0.64
Anterior	72.0	96.0	20.22	3.4	99.0	3.53	39.5	33.1	0.59
Posterior	20.0	84.7	1.31	19.2	99.2	24.97	71.0	37.0	1.13
Multidirectional	42.9	85.1	2.87	17.6	33.5	0.26	41.7	36.5	0.66
SLAP lesions	2.8	84.3	0.18	3.0	98.8	2.48	47.0	55.0	1.04
Biceps disease	0.0	84.5	0.00	0.0	98.7	0.00	68.0	46.0	1.24
AC joint arthritis	4.1	83.7	0.25	0.0	98.6	0.00	41.0	95.0	8.20

View Larger

TABLE IV Physical Examination Signs and Tests for the Shoulder from Our Database (Part D)*

	Anterior Slide Test					Lift-Off Test				Painful Arc Sign
Diagnosis	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR
Rotator cuff	14.0	76.4	0.59	9.5	78.9	0.45	67.3	49.7	1.34
Tendinosis/bursitis	22.0	81.4	1.18	0.0	84.6	0.00	70.6	46.9	1.33
Partial-thickness tear	18.5	81.2	0.99	3.7	84.0	0.23	67.4	47.0	1.27
Full-thickness tear	11.0	78.5	0.51	9.6	82.8	0.56	75.8	61.8	1.98
Massive tear	5.6	80.5	0.29	27.8	85.8	1.96	76.4	42.6	1.33
Glenohumeral arthritis	33.2	84.3	2.12	28.9	89.4	2.73	71.4	44.9	1.30
Adhesive capsulitis	6.7	80.9	0.35	0.0	84.8	0.00	63.0	41.7	1.08
Glenohumeral instability	14.4	80.1	0.72	7.7	84.0	0.48	22.9	32.8	0.34
Anterior	14.1	80.5	0.72	4.0	84.1	0.25	19.7	35.4	0.30
Posterior	25.0	81.3	1.34	25.0	85.3	1.70	23.3	40.8	0.39
Multidirectional	9.1	81.0	0.48	0.0	84.9	0.00	23.8	41.0	0.40
SLAP lesions	19.4	81.2	1.03	0.0	84.6	0.00	48.5	41.3	0.83
Biceps disease	50.0	81.3	2.68	28.0	89.0	2.61	83.3	41.7	1.43
AC joint arthritis	24.0	81.6	1.30	5.3	84.4	0.34	47.0	45.0	0.85

Add to My JBJS

TABLE IV Physical Examination Signs and Tests for the Shoulder from Our Database (Part D)*

	Anterior Slide Test					Lift-Off Test				Painful Arc Sign
Diagnosis	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR
Rotator cuff	14.0	76.4	0.59	9.5	78.9	0.45	67.3	49.7	1.34
Tendinosis/bursitis	22.0	81.4	1.18	0.0	84.6	0.00	70.6	46.9	1.33
Partial-thickness tear	18.5	81.2	0.99	3.7	84.0	0.23	67.4	47.0	1.27
Full-thickness tear	11.0	78.5	0.51	9.6	82.8	0.56	75.8	61.8	1.98
Massive tear	5.6	80.5	0.29	27.8	85.8	1.96	76.4	42.6	1.33
Glenohumeral arthritis	33.2	84.3	2.12	28.9	89.4	2.73	71.4	44.9	1.30
Adhesive capsulitis	6.7	80.9	0.35	0.0	84.8	0.00	63.0	41.7	1.08
Glenohumeral instability	14.4	80.1	0.72	7.7	84.0	0.48	22.9	32.8	0.34
Anterior	14.1	80.5	0.72	4.0	84.1	0.25	19.7	35.4	0.30
Posterior	25.0	81.3	1.34	25.0	85.3	1.70	23.3	40.8	0.39
Multidirectional	9.1	81.0	0.48	0.0	84.9	0.00	23.8	41.0	0.40
SLAP lesions	19.4	81.2	1.03	0.0	84.6	0.00	48.5	41.3	0.83
Biceps disease	50.0	81.3	2.68	28.0	89.0	2.61	83.3	41.7	1.43
AC joint arthritis	24.0	81.6	1.30	5.3	84.4	0.34	47.0	45.0	0.85

View Larger

TABLE V Physical Examination Signs and Tests for the Shoulder from Our Database (Part E)*

	Cross-Body Adduction Test					Acromioclavicular Resisted Extension Test					External Rotation Lag Sign		Whipple Test
Diagnosis	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR
Rotator cuff	22.3	75.0	0.89	17.7	80.2	0.89	7.3	84.1	0.46	79.9	32.5	1.18
Tendinosis/bursitis	25.4	79.7	1.25	20.3	81.3	1.08	0.0	87.6	0.00	72.7	23.9	0.96
Partial-thickness tear	16.7	78.5	0.78	22.5	81.6	1.22	3.6	87.3	0.28	71.0	23.4	0.93
Full-thickness tear	23.4	80.8	1.22	17.6	80.9	0.92	3.1	85.0	0.20	81.4	27.0	1.11
Massive tear	12.2	75.7	0.50	11.0	80.8	0.57	35.0	89.1	3.21	100.0	25.9	1.35
Glenohumeral arthritis	21.9	75.8	0.90	13.0	79.7	0.64	14.2	88.9	1.28	87.5	24.9	1.17
Adhesive capsulitis	11.9	76.0	0.50	10.3	81.0	0.55	12.5	87.9	1.03	71.4	24.0	0.94
Glenohumeral instability	11.0	73.1	0.41	9.0	78.8	0.42	7.5	87.4	0.60	48.7	19.0	0.60
Anterior	10.4	74.1	0.40	7.5	79.4	0.37	3.8	87.3	0.30	46.2	20.6	0.58
Posterior	12.1	76.0	0.51	13.3	81.1	0.71	12.5	87.9	1.03	57.1	23.6	0.75
Multidirectional	11.5	76.1	0.48	15.0	81.2	0.80	0.0	87.8	0.00	33.3	23.6	0.44
SLAP lesions	28.6	76.4	1.21	18.8	81.2	1.00	0.0	87.6	0.00	75.0	24.1	0.99
Biceps disease	0.0	76.2	0.00	0.0	81.1	0.00	20.0	88.0	1.67	80.0	24.2	1.06
AC joint arthritis	77.0	79.0	3.67	72.0	85.0	4.80	5.3	87.6	0.42	88.2	25.0	1.18

Add to My JBJS

TABLE V Physical Examination Signs and Tests for the Shoulder from Our Database (Part E)*

	Cross-Body Adduction Test					Acromioclavicular Resisted Extension Test					External Rotation Lag Sign		Whipple Test
Diagnosis	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR	S (%)	Sp (%)	LR
Rotator cuff	22.3	75.0	0.89	17.7	80.2	0.89	7.3	84.1	0.46	79.9	32.5	1.18
Tendinosis/bursitis	25.4	79.7	1.25	20.3	81.3	1.08	0.0	87.6	0.00	72.7	23.9	0.96
Partial-thickness tear	16.7	78.5	0.78	22.5	81.6	1.22	3.6	87.3	0.28	71.0	23.4	0.93
Full-thickness tear	23.4	80.8	1.22	17.6	80.9	0.92	3.1	85.0	0.20	81.4	27.0	1.11
Massive tear	12.2	75.7	0.50	11.0	80.8	0.57	35.0	89.1	3.21	100.0	25.9	1.35
Glenohumeral arthritis	21.9	75.8	0.90	13.0	79.7	0.64	14.2	88.9	1.28	87.5	24.9	1.17
Adhesive capsulitis	11.9	76.0	0.50	10.3	81.0	0.55	12.5	87.9	1.03	71.4	24.0	0.94
Glenohumeral instability	11.0	73.1	0.41	9.0	78.8	0.42	7.5	87.4	0.60	48.7	19.0	0.60
Anterior	10.4	74.1	0.40	7.5	79.4	0.37	3.8	87.3	0.30	46.2	20.6	0.58
Posterior	12.1	76.0	0.51	13.3	81.1	0.71	12.5	87.9	1.03	57.1	23.6	0.75
Multidirectional	11.5	76.1	0.48	15.0	81.2	0.80	0.0	87.8	0.00	33.3	23.6	0.44
SLAP lesions	28.6	76.4	1.21	18.8	81.2	1.00	0.0	87.6	0.00	75.0	24.1	0.99
Biceps disease	0.0	76.2	0.00	0.0	81.1	0.00	20.0	88.0	1.67	80.0	24.2	1.06
AC joint arthritis	77.0	79.0	3.67	72.0	85.0	4.80	5.3	87.6	0.42	88.2	25.0	1.18

Rotator Cuff Disease

It is difficult for clinicians to examine patients for the presence of rotator cuff disease because there are many different types of associated abnormalities (e.g., painful tendinopathy [no tear], partial tears on the bursal or joint side of the involved tendon, full-thickness tears, and massive tears). In addition, controversy exists over exactly what causes the pain of "impingement"^14,23,27-30.

Some authors have contended that the spectrum ranging from rotator cuff tendinopathy to full-thickness tears should be called "rotator cuff disease," rather than impingement^31,32. However, most studies of rotator cuff disease have divided these conditions into two groups: (1) tendinosis and partial-thickness rotator cuff tears (early stage of rotator cuff disease); and (2) full-thickness and massive rotator cuff tears. Therefore, these entities are presented as "bursitis" (painful tendinosis, or no rotator cuff tearing), partial-thickness tears, or full-thickness tears, while recognizing that there is a continuum of disease and symptoms that overlap.

Tendinosis ("Bursitis") and Partial-Thickness Tears

Neer^14,23 postulated that the early stages of rotator cuff disease were inflammation and swelling of the specific rotator cuff tendon. Although the literature suggests that the Neer impingement sign^33,34 is very sensitive for the presence of painful tendinosis, this test is not specific for the presence of rotator cuff disorders. In his descriptions of the impingement sign, Neer^14,23 cautioned that pain elicited with passive flexion of the arm could be indicative of a wide range of shoulder conditions. The Hawkins-Kennedy impingement sign³⁵ has a sensitivity that is similar to that of the Neer sign, but it has a low specificity for the presence of rotator cuff disease. Neither of these signs has high sensitivity nor specificity for the presence of full-thickness rotator cuff tears⁴.

Full-Thickness Tears (Supraspinatus, Infraspinatus)

The best physical examination signs for rotator cuff disease include weakness in external rotation, a positive drop-arm sign, and a painful arc of motion. If a patient is more than sixty years old and has these three signs, then there is a 91% chance of a full-thickness rotator cuff tear (likelihood ratio, 15)⁴. Another study suggested that if a patient was older than sixty years and had a positive Neer or Hawkins-Kennedy impingement sign with weakness in abduction, there was a 98% chance that the patient had a full-thickness rotator cuff tear³⁶.

Subscapularis Tendon Tears

Described tests for the subscapularis muscle and tendon are the lift-off test, the belly-press test, and the bear-hug test^21,37,38. All of these tests have been reported to be beneficial in diagnosing subscapularis dysfunction; however, they are of limited usefulness for patients who have stiff shoulders that do not allow independent movement of the glenohumeral joint (e.g., frozen shoulders or shoulders with severe arthritis).

Although some studies have indicated that the bear-hug and the modified belly-press test are helpful in diagnosing partial tears of the subscapularis tendon^38,39, these findings have not been replicated by independent observers.

Acromioclavicular Joint Abnormalities

Physical examination can help the clinician accurately diagnose abnormalities of the acromioclavicular joint. It is well known that degenerative changes of the acromioclavicular joint are extremely common in patients who are older than thirty years⁴⁰. Therefore, the acromioclavicular joint should not be presumed to be the source of pain in the shoulder unless it can be confirmed on physical examination. Local tenderness is considered by most physicians to be the sine qua non for making the diagnosis of acromioclavicular joint disorders. In most patients, pain relief resulting from an injection of local anesthetic into the joint can confirm that the acromioclavicular joint is the cause of the symptoms.

Although the classic cross-body adduction test²⁴ is helpful diagnostically, the acromioclavicular resisted extension test^2,41 and the active compression test² are more specific (but not more sensitive) for the presence of acromioclavicular abnormalities. The use of another test, the Paxinos test^42,43, has not been verified by independent observers.

Shoulder Instability

Anterior Instability

Studies^44,45 have shown that physical examination for anterior shoulder instability is clinically helpful if the criterion for a positive test is the reproduction of a symptom of instability. Specificity of the anterior apprehension test, the relocation test, and the surprise test exceeds 95%^44,46,47. Apprehension during an anterior apprehension test is associated with a likelihood ratio of 18, and relief of apprehension during a relocation test is associated with a likelihood ratio of 10.

Except with regard to the relocation test, the sensitivity of these tests is low because many patients with traumatic shoulder instability do not have apprehension during these tests. However, if pain is used as a criterion for a positive test, then these tests are generally neither sensitive nor specific.

Studies of shoulder laxity testing and its role in determining the presence of instability^22,45 have identified shoulder laxity as a normal measurement of joint mobility; laxity is considered pathologic only if it reproduces symptoms of instability.

Posterior Instability

To our knowledge, there have only been a few studies^22,48 of the accuracy of physical examination in the diagnosis of posterior instability. If a patient can create the subluxation(called "demonstrable," "voluntary," "muscular," or "habitual") and it is symptomatic, the diagnosis is not in question. However, other variations of posterior instability are not easy to detect with physical examination. It has been suggested that the posterior apprehension sign is a helpful test⁴⁹, but, with use of high-speed photography, we have found that it is biomechanically incorrect^50,51. The jerk test has also been suggested as an accurate method of testing for posterior instability^52-54, but this finding has not been replicated by independent observers.

One study describing the use of posterior laxity testing to diagnose posterior instability has indicated a difference between normal shoulder laxity and instability²². Instability is laxity that is excessive enough to produce the symptoms of subluxation or dislocation. The ability to subluxate the shoulder over the posterior rim of the glenoid is very common, even in asymptomatic shoulders, so for a posterior drawer test to be helpful in diagnosing instability, it should reproduce the symptoms of instability in the patient. To our knowledge, only one study⁵⁰ has evaluated the posterior drawer test as a diagnostic test for posterior instability.

Multidirectional Instability

To our knowledge, no study has evaluated the accuracy, validity, or clinical usefulness of current tests for diagnosing multidirectional instability. Multidirectional instability of the shoulder has been traditionally defined⁵⁵ as symptomatic instability in two or more directions (anterior, posterior, or inferior). The criterion for inferior instability has been the sulcus sign, which is typically graded as I (<1.0 cm), II (1.0 cm to 2.0 cm), or III (more than 2.0 cm)^3,56-58.

This scheme for describing the severity of inferior shoulder laxity presents several difficulties: (1) to our knowledge, the distance of translation between the humeral head and the glenoid with an inferiorly directed force has not been validated for the different degrees of translation; (2) high grades of inferior laxity are common in asymptomatic individuals, especially in young patients; (3) laxity alone does not necessarily indicate instability; and (4) pain is generally not a reliable criterion for the diagnosis of instability. Although apprehension or subluxation of the humeral head over the glenoid rim is a better measure of instability, these latter criteria are not commonly found during sulcus testing of the shoulder. The role of inferior laxity in recurrent shoulder instability remains controversial. It has been suggested that loose-jointed individuals (asymptomatic with a grade-II or grade-III sulcus sign) with instability in a second direction should be diagnosed as having physiologic hyperlaxity with anterior or posterior instability^59,60.

To our knowledge, no studies have evaluated the clinical examination of patients with multidirectional instability, perhaps because there is no gold standard. However, one study has evaluated the effect of mistaking laxity for instability when making the diagnosis of multidirectional instability³. That study showed that if asymptomatic laxity in any direction is used as a criterion for multidirectional instability, it can substantially change the numbers of patients who are given that diagnosis³.

Anterior and Posterior Lesions of the Superior Labrum

The diagnosis of anterior and posterior lesions of the superior labrum on the basis of physical examination alone remains elusive. There are several physical examination tests for these lesions, but reports have shown variable clinical usefulness and accuracy^5,61,62. In addition, studies of such tests differ in terms of patient population, method of lesion documentation (magnetic resonance imaging or arthroscopy), type of examiner (independent or the center where the examination originated [the person or group that describes a test typically has better results than others]), and use of a control group.

The choice of the best diagnostic modality continues to be controversial: some authors are proponents of the use of multiple tests^61,63 while others prefer the use of shoulder arthroscopy⁶⁴. At least one study has shown poor interobserver and intraobserver agreement between surgeons who were asked to view videotapes showing anterior and posterior lesions of the superior labrum⁶⁵. Therefore, there is as yet no one universally accepted modality for making the diagnosis.

Biceps Tendon Tears (Other than Anterior and Posterior Lesions of the Superior Labrum)

Biceps tendon abnormalities other than anterior and posterior lesions of the superior labrum include biceps tenosynovitis, partial biceps tendon tears, biceps tendon subluxations, and biceps entrapment in the joint^64,66. Diagnosing any of these lesions with use of physical examination is difficult because an isolated biceps tendon abnormality is relatively rare⁶⁷. A partial tear of the biceps tendon, subluxation of the biceps tendon, or biceps tenosynovitis often coexists with rotator cuff tears or other intra-articular abnormalities. Therefore, pain in the anterior or lateral aspect of the shoulder during testing of the biceps tendon cannot be reliably ascribed to the biceps tendon alone.

Existing tests and examination techniques for such lesions are not reliable. For example, the Speed test is neither sensitive nor specific for biceps tendon abnormality⁶⁷ and palpation of the biceps tendon is not clinically diagnostic because of the close proximity of the insertions of the supraspinatus and the subscapularis tendon. A lift-off test that elicits pain in the anterior aspect of the shoulder may be diagnostic (likelihood ratio, 2.6)⁶⁷, but this determination requires additional study.

The Future

In the future, there needs to be more sophisticated studies that integrate history, physical examination, and imaging so that the clinician can more accurately diagnose shoulder lesions. For instance, although the clinician should still examine a patient who presents with a history of anterior shoulder dislocation and a radiograph proving that diagnosis, the results of the apprehension test are obviously less critical when radiographs prove the diagnosis. However, for other entities for which the diagnosis is difficult to make on the basis of history, examination, and imaging (e.g., anterior and posterior lesions of the superior labrum, biceps tendon lesions, and isolated chondral lesions), this type of statistical analysis would prove helpful in diagnosing and guiding treatment. In the future, it may be possible to enter the results of patient history, physical examination, and imaging into a computer and have the most likely diagnosis be calculated statistically.

The other major advance may be the ability to determine the relationship of physical examination to the success of nonoperative or surgical treatment. This capability would allow the clinician to determine if certain physical findings or factors from the patient's history preclude certain types of treatment but relatively guarantee the success of others.

Conclusions

This summary of the literature is reflective of the complexity of shoulder conditions and their presentation in patients and shows that the results of examination are variable and that statistical analysis may not be a substantial improvement on the original observations of Codman¹. In this study, we created a revised version of his table for the purpose of showing the utility of statistical analysis in evaluating his original observations (Tables I through V ). Our tables differ from the original (Fig. 1) in that Codman included more subjective information as well as more conditions that may affect the shoulder but that are not intrinsic just to the shoulder (e.g., cervical radiculopathy). To recreate his table in its entirety, additional study would be necessary to include the wide spectrum of diseases that can affect the upper extremity and shoulder. The shoulder continues to be a challenge for clinicians because of this inexactitude, but advances in biology, biomechanics, pathologic abnormalities, and clinical medicine will continue to unravel the mysteries of the shoulder complex and the conditions that affect it.

Appendix

Seven summary tables presenting the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of specific diagnostic tests for each disease category derived from the literature are available with the electronic versions of this article, on our web site at (go to the article citation and click on "Supplementary Material") and on our quarterly CD/DVD (call our subscription department, at 781-449-9780, to order the CD or DVD). Image Not Available

Acknowledgements

Note: We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Juan Garzon-Muvdi, MD, in the preparation of this manuscript.

References

Codman EA. The shoulder. Rupture of the supraspinatus tendon and other lesions in or about the subacromial bursa. Boston: Thomas Todd; 1934. 1934

Chronopoulos E, Kim TK, Park HB, Ashenbrenner D, McFarland EG. Diagnostic value of physical tests for isolated chronic acromioclavicular lesions. Am J Sports Med.2004;32:655-61.32655 2004 [PubMed][CrossRef]

McFarland EG, Kim TK, Park HB, Neira CA, Gutierrez MI. The effect of variation in definition on the diagnosis of multidirectional instability of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2003;85:2138-44.852138 2003

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;87:1446-55.871446 2005 [CrossRef]

Kim TK, Queale WS, Cosgarea AJ, McFarland EG. Clinical features of the different types of SLAP lesions. An analysis of one hundred and thirty-nine cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2003;85:66-71.8566 2003

Rao AG, Kim TK, Chronopoulos E, McFarland EG. Anatomical variants in the anterosuperior glenoid labrum. A statistical analysis of seventy-three cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2003;85:653-9.85653 2003

Jia X, Ji JH, Petersen SA, Keefer J, McFarland EG. Clinical evaluation of the shoulder shrug sign. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2008;466:2813-9.4662813 2008 [CrossRef]

Jia X, Ji JH, Petersen SA, Freehill MT, McFarland EG. An analysis of shoulder laxity in patients undergoing shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2009;91:2144-50.912144 2009 [CrossRef]

Richards RR. Effectiveness evaluation of the shoulder. In: Rockwood CA Jr, Matsen FA 3rd, Wirth MA, Lippitt SB, editors. The shoulder. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2009. p 267-78. 2009

Richards RR, An KN, Bigliani LU, Friedman RJ, Gartsman GM, Gristina AG, Iannotti JP, Mow VC, Sidles JA, Zuckerman JD. A standardized method for the assessment of shoulder function. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.1994;3:347-52.3347 1994 [CrossRef]

Ellman H, Hanker G, Bayer M. Repair of the rotator cuff. End-result study of factors influencing reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1986;68:1136-44.681136 1986

L'Insalata JC, Warren RF, Cohen SB, Altchek DW, Peterson MG. A self-administered questionnaire for assessment of symptoms and function of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1997;79:738-48.79738 1997 [CrossRef]

McFarland EG. Examination of the shoulder: the complete guide. New York: Thieme; 2006. 2006

Neer CS 2nd. Impingement lesions. Clin Orthop Relat Res.1983;173:70-7.17370 1983

Hawkins RJ, Kennedy JC. Impingement syndrome in athletes. Am J Sports Med.1980;8:151-8.8151 1980 [CrossRef]

Bennett WF. Specificity of the Speed's test: arthroscopic technique for evaluating the biceps tendon at the level of the bicipital groove. Arthroscopy.1998;14:789-96.14789 1998 [CrossRef]

Rowe CR, Zarins B. Recurrent transient subluxation of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1981;63:863-72.63863 1981

Kessel L. Clinical disorders of the shoulder. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1982. 1982

O'Brien SJ, Pagnani MJ, Fealy S, McGlynn SR, Wilson JB. The active compression test: a new and effective test for diagnosing labral tears and acromioclavicular joint abnormality. Am J Sports Med.1998;26:610-3.26610 1998

Kibler WB. Specificity and sensitivity of the anterior slide test in throwing athletes with superior glenoid labral tears. Arthroscopy.1995;11:296-300.11296 1995 [CrossRef]

Gerber C, Krushell RJ. Isolated rupture of the tendon of the subscapularis muscle. Clinical features in 16 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br.1991;73:389-94.73389 1991

Gerber C, Ganz R. Clinical assessment of instability of the shoulder. With special reference to anterior and posterior drawer tests. J Bone Joint Surg Br.1984;66:551-6.66551 1984

Neer CS 2nd. Anterior acromioplasty for the chronic impingement syndrome in the shoulder: a preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1972;54:41-50.5441 1972

McLaughlin HL. On the "frozen" shoulder. Bull Hosp Joint Dis.1951;12:383-93.12383 1951

Savoie FH 3rd, Field LD, Atchinson S. Anterior superior instability with rotator cuff tearing: SLAC lesion. Oper Tech Sports Med.2000;8:221-4.8221 2000 [CrossRef]

Hertel R, Ballmer FT, Lambert SM, Gerber C. Lag signs in the diagnosis of rotator cuff rupture. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.1996;5:307-13.5307 1996 [CrossRef]

Uhthoff HK, Sarkar K. The effect of aging on the soft tissues of the shoulder. In: Matsen FA 3rd, Fu FH, Hawkins RJ, editors. The shoulder: a balance of mobility and stability. Rosemont, IL: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; 1993. p 269-78. 1993

Yuan J, Murrell GA, Trickett A, Wang MX. Involvement of cytochrome c release and caspase-3 activation in the oxidative stress-induced apoptosis in human tendon fibroblasts. Biochim Biophys Acta.2003;1641:35-41.164135 2003 [CrossRef]

Yuan J, Murrell GA, Wei AQ, Wang MX. Apoptosis in rotator cuff tendonopathy. J Orthop Res.2002;20:1372-9.201372 2002 [CrossRef]

Yuan J, Wang MX, Murrell GA. Cell death and tendinopathy. Clin Sports Med.2003;22:693-701.22693 2003 [CrossRef]

McFarland EG, Selhi HS, Keyurapan E. Clinical evaluation of impingement: what to do and what works. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2006;88:432-41.88432 2006

McFarland EG. Examination of the shoulder: the complete guide. New York: Thieme; 2006. Rotator cuff disease and impingement; p 126-61. 2006

Leroux JL, Thomas E, Bonnel F, Blotman F. Diagnostic value of clinical tests for shoulder impingement syndrome. Rev Rhum Engl Ed.1995;62:423-8.62423 1995

Calis M, Akgün K, Birtane M, Karacan I, Calis H, Tüzün F. Diagnostic values of clinical diagnostic tests in subacromial impingement syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis.2000;59:44-7.5944 2000 [CrossRef]

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;9:299-301.9299 2000 [CrossRef]

Murrell GA, Walton JR. Diagnosis of rotator cuff tears. Lancet.2001;357:769-70. Erratum in: Lancet. 2001;357:1452.357769 2001 [CrossRef]

Gerber C, Hersche O, Farron A. Isolated rupture of the subscapularis tendon. Results of operative repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1996;78:1015-23.781015 1996

Barth JRH, Burkhart SS, De Beer JF. The bear-hug test: a new and sensitive test for diagnosing a subscapularis tear. Arthroscopy.2006;22:1076-84.221076 2006 [CrossRef]

Tokish JM, Decker MJ, Ellis HB, Torry MR, Hawkins RJ. The belly-press test for the physical examination of the subscapularis muscle: electromyographic validation and comparison to the lift-off test. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.2003;12:427-30.12427 2003 [CrossRef]

Stein BES, Wiater JM, Pfaff HC, Bigliani LU, Levine WN. Detection of acromioclavicular joint pathology in asymptomatic shoulders with magnetic resonance imaging. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.2001;10:204-8.10204 2001 [CrossRef]

Jacob AK, Sallay PI. Therapeutic efficacy of corticosteroid injections in the acromioclavicular joint. Biomed Sci Instrum.1997;34:380-5.34380 1997

McFarland EG. Examination of the shoulder: the complete guide. New York: Thieme; 2006. The acromioclavicular and sternoclavicular joints; p 244-57. 2006

Walton J, Mahajan S, Paxinos A, Marshall J, Bryant C, Shnier R, Quinn R, Murrell GA. Diagnostic values of tests for acromioclavicular joint pain. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2004;86:807-12.86807 2004

Lo IK, Nonweiler B, Woolfrey M, Litchfield R, Kirkley A. An evaluation of the apprehension, relocation, and surprise tests for anterior shoulder instability. Am J Sports Med.2004;32:301-7.32301 2004 [CrossRef]

Farber AJ, Castillo RC, Clough M, Bahk M, McFarland EG. Clinical assessment of three common tests for traumatic anterior shoulder instability. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2006;88:1467-74.881467 2006 [CrossRef]

Speer KP, Hannafin JA, Altchek DW, Warren RF. An evaluation of the shoulder relocation test. Am J Sports Med.1994;22:177-83.22177 1994 [CrossRef]

Hegedus EJ, Goode A, Campbell S, Morin A, Tamaddoni M, Moorman CT 3rd, Cook C. Physical examination tests of the shoulder: a systematic review with meta-analysis of individual tests. Br J Sports Med.2008;42:80-92.4280 2008

Kessel L. Clinical disorders of the shoulder. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1982. Posterior dislocation of the shoulder; p 150-65. 1982

O'Driscoll SW, Evans DC. Contralateral shoulder instability following anterior repair. An epidemiological investigation. J Bone Joint Surg Br.1991;73:941-6.73941 1991

McFarland EG. Examination of the shoulder: the complete guide. New York: Thieme; 2006. Instability and laxity; p 162-212. 2006

McFarland EG, Jobe FW, Perry J, Glousman R, Pink M. Electromyographic analysis of recurrent posterior instability of the shoulder. In: Post M, Morrey BF, Hawkins RJ, editors. Surgery of the shoulder. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book; 1990. p 112-6. 1990

Kim SH, Kim HK, Sun JI, Park JS, Oh I. Arthroscopic capsulolabroplasty for posteroinferior multidirectional instability of the shoulder. Am J Sports Med.2004;32:594-607.32594 2004 [CrossRef]

Kim SH, Park JS, Jeong WK, Shin SK. The Kim test: a novel test for posteroinferior labral lesion of the shoulder—a comparison to the jerk test. Am J Sports Med.2005;33:1188-92.331188 2005 [CrossRef]

Nakagawa S, Yoneda M, Hayashida K, Obata M, Fukushima S, Miyazaki Y. Forced shoulder abduction and elbow flexion test: a new simple clinical test to detect superior labral injury in the throwing shoulder. Arthroscopy.2005;21:1290-5.211290 2005 [CrossRef]

Neer CS 2nd, Foster CR. Inferior capsular shift for involuntary inferior and multidirectional instability of the shoulder. A preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1980;62:897-908.62897 1980

Silliman JF, Hawkins RJ. Classification and physical diagnosis of instability of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res.1993;291:7-19.2917 1993

Bahk M, Keyurapan E, Tasaki A, Sauers EL, McFarland EG. Laxity testing of the shoulder: a review. Am J Sports Med.2007;35:131-44.35131 2007 [CrossRef]

Altchek DW, Warren RF, Skyhar MJ, Ortiz G. T-plasty modification of the Bankart procedure for multidirectional instability of the anterior and inferior types. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1991;73:105-12.73105 1991

Gerber C, Nyffeler RW. Classification of glenohumeral joint instability. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2002;400:65-76.40065 2002 [CrossRef]

Gerber C. Observations on the classification of instability. In: Warner JJP, Iannotti JP, Gerber C, editors. Complex and revision problems in shoulder surgery. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1997. p 9-18. 1997

Walsworth MK, Doukas WC, Murphy KP, Mielcarek BJ, Michener LA. Reliability and diagnostic accuracy of history and physical examination for diagnosing glenoid labral tears. Am J Sports Med.2008;36:162-8.36162 2008 [CrossRef]

Tennent TD, Beach WR, Meyers JF. A review of the special tests associated with shoulder examination. Part II: laxity, instability, and superior labral anterior and posterior (SLAP) lesions. Am J Sports Med.2003;31:301-7.31301 2003

McFarland EG, Kim TK, Savino RM. Clinical assessment of three common tests for superior labral anterior-posterior lesions. Am J Sports Med.2002;30:810-5.30810 2002

McFarland EG. Examination of the shoulder: the complete guide. New York: Thieme; 2006. Examination of the biceps tendon and superior labrum anterior and posterior (SLAP) lesions; p 213-43. 2006

Gobezie R, Zurakowski D, Lavery K, Millett PJ, Cole BJ, Warner JJP. Analysis of interobserver and intraobserver variability in the diagnosis and treatment of SLAP tears using the Snyder classification. Am J Sports Med.2008;36:1373-9.361373 2008 [CrossRef]

Boileau P, Ahrens PM, Hatzidakis AM. Entrapment of the long head of the biceps tendon: the hourglass biceps—a cause of pain and locking of the shoulder. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.2004;13:249-57.13249 2004 [CrossRef]

Gill HS, El Rassi G, Bahk MS, Castillo RC, McFarland EG. Physical examination for partial tears of the biceps tendon. Am J Sports Med.2007;35:1334-40.351334 2007 [CrossRef]

Holtby R, Razmjou H. Accuracy of the Speed's and Yergason's tests in detecting biceps pathology and SLAP lesions: comparison with arthroscopic findings. Arthroscopy.2004;20:231-6.20231 2004 [CrossRef]

Naredo E, Aguado P, De Miguel E, Uson J, Mayordomo L, Gijon-Baños J, Martin-Mola E. Painful shoulder: comparison of physical examination and ultrasonographic findings. Ann Rheum Dis.2002;61:132-6.61132 2002 [CrossRef]

Smith CB, Xerogeanes JW, Hawkins RJ. Accuracy of rotator cuff diagnoses on the basis of physical examination with and without MRI. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of The American Orthopaedic Society of Sports Medicine; 2003 Jul 20—23; San Diego, CA. 2003

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;48:1633-7.481633 2000

Itoi E, Kido T, Sano A, Urayama M, Sato K. Which is more useful, the "full can test" or the "empty can test," in detecting the torn supraspinatus tendon? Am J Sports Med.1999;27:65-8.2765 1999

Scheibel M, Magosch P, Pritsch M, Lichtenberg S, Habermeyer P. The belly-off sign: a new clinical diagnostic sign for subscapularis lesions. Arthroscopy.2005;21:1229-35.211229 2005 [CrossRef]

Walch G, Boulahia A, Calderone S, Robinson AH. The ‘dropping’ and ‘hornblower's’ signs in evaluation of rotator-cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Br.1998;80:624-8.80624 1998 [CrossRef]

Gross ML, Distefano MC. Anterior release test. A new test for occult shoulder instability. Clin Orthop Relat Res.1997;339:105-8.339105 1997 [CrossRef]

Meister K, Buckley B, Batts J. The posterior impingement sign: diagnosis of rotator cuff and posterior labral tears secondary to internal impingement in overhand athletes. Am J Orthop.2004;33:412-5.33412 2004 [CrossRef]

Guanche CA, Jones DC. Clinical testing for tears of the glenoid labrum. Arthroscopy.2003;19:517-23.19517 2003 [CrossRef]

Morgan CD, Burkhart SS, Palmeri M, Gillespie M. Type II SLAP lesions: three subtypes and their relationships to superior instability and rotator cuff tears. Arthroscopy.1998;14:553-65.14553 1998 [CrossRef]

Myers TH, Zemanovic JR, Andrews JR. The resisted supination external rotation test: a new test for the diagnosis of superior labral anterior posterior lesions. Am J Sports Med.2005;33:1315-20.331315 2005 [CrossRef]

Stetson WB, Templin K. The crank test, the O'Brien test, and routine magnetic resonance imaging scans in the diagnosis of labral tears. Am J Sports Med.2002;30:806-9.30806 2002

Oh JH, Kim JY, Kim WS, Gong HS, Lee JH. The evaluation of various physical examinations for the diagnosis of type II superior labrum anterior and posterior lesion. Am J Sports Med.2008;36:353-9.36353 2008 [CrossRef]

Parentis MA, Glousman RE, Mohr KS, Yocum LA. An evaluation of the provocative tests for superior labral anterior posterior lesions. Am J Sports Med.2006;34:265-8.34265 2006 [CrossRef]

Kim SH, Ha KI, Han KY. Biceps load test: a clinical test for superior labrum anterior and posterior lesions in shoulders with recurrent anterior dislocations. Am J Sports Med.1999;27:300-3.27300 1999

Kim SH, Ha KI, Ahn JH, Kim SH, Choi HJ. Biceps load test II: a clinical test for SLAP lesions of the shoulder. Arthroscopy.2001;17:160-4.17160 2001 [CrossRef]

Kim YS, Kim JM, Ha KY, Choy S, Joo MW, Chung YG. The passive compression test. A new clinical test for superior labral tears of the shoulder. Am J Sports Med.2007;35:1489-94.351489 2007 [CrossRef]

Liu SH, Henry MH, Nuccion SL. A prospective evaluation of a new physical examination in predicting glenoid labral tears. Am J Sports Med.1996;24:721-5.24721 1996 [CrossRef]

Mimori K, Muneta T, Nakagawa T, Shinomiya K. A new pain provocation test for superior labral tears of the shoulder. Am J Sports Med.1999;27:137-42.27137 1999

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;34:194-200.34194 2004

Ardic F, Kahraman Y, Kacar M, Kahraman MC, Findikoglu G, Yorgancioglu ZR. Shoulder impingement syndrome. Relationships between clinical, functional, and radiologic findings. Am J Phys Med Rehabil.2006;85:53-60.8553 2006 [CrossRef]

Topics

bursitis ; pain ; tendon ; shoulder region ; acromioclavicular joint ; rotator cuff injury ; biceps brachii muscle ; shoulder instability ; tendinosis

First Page Preview

View Large

Username

Password

Access for Patients

Forgot Password?

Have a subscription to the print edition?

Not a Subscriber?

Buy this Article

Get online access for 30 days for $35

New to JBJS?

Subscribe to the online edition for 30 days for $75

Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.

Have a subscription to the print edition?

Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.

Activate your online account now

Forgot your password?

Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

Username:*

Email Address:*

Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org

References

Accreditation Statement

These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.

CME Activities Associated with This Article

Submit a Comment

Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

* = Required Field

Comment Author(s) * (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)

Example: John Doe

Affiliation & Institution*

Comment Title*

Comment*

Cancel

Print
PDF
Email

Recipient(s) will receive an email with a link (good for 5 days) to 'Examination of the Shoulder: The Past, the Present, and the Future'.
Your Name:*
Example: John Doe

Email Address:* CC Me:
Enter your valid email address. Example: jdoe@example.com

Recipient's Email Address:*

Separate multiple email address with semi-colons (up to 5).

Subject:* 's The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery: 'Examination of the Shoulder: The Past, the Present, and the Future'
Subject for your email.

Message:

(Optional, message will truncate at 1000 characters)

Processing your request... Please Wait...

Copyright © in the material you requested is held by The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, Inc. (unless otherwise noted). This email ability is provided as a courtesy, and by using it you agree that that you are requesting the material solely for personal, non-commercial use, and that it is subject to Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, Inc.'s Terms of Use. The information provided in order to email this topic will not be used to send unsolicited email, nor will it be furnished to third parties. Please refer to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery Inc.'s Privacy Policy for further information.

Copyright © The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery Inc. All rights reserved.
Share
Get Citation

Xiaofeng Jia, Steve A. Petersen, Abtin H. Khosravi, Venkat Almareddi, Vinodhkumar Pannirselvam, Edward G. McFarland; Examination of the Shoulder: The Past, the Present, and the Future. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. 2009 Nov;91(Supplement_6):10-18.

Download citation file:

RIS (Zotero)

EndNote

BibTex

Medlars

ProCite

RefWorks

Reference Manager

Copyright © The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
Rights & Permissions
Article Alerts

Processing your request... Please Wait.
Submit a Comment
Data Supplements