Abstract
We investigated the accuracy of clinical signs for the diagnosis of rotator cuff disease. Fifty patients with history suggestive of rotator cuff disease (subacromial impingement syndrome or rotator cuff tear) were examined by two observers to determine the accuracy of commonly used clinical tests for the condition. The observers were a consultant (cons.) with an established shoulder practice and a senior registrar (reg.) with an interest in shoulder surgery. The clinical signs of impingement syndrome we evaluated include the painful arc, the drop arm test, Neer’s sign and Hawkins’ sign. For rotator cuff pathology we evaluated the strength of abduction initiation and at 90 degrees abduction for supraspinatus, Speed’s and Yergason’s tests for biceps, strength of shoulder external rotation for infraspinatus and the Gerber lift-off test for subscapularis. We compared our clinical accuracy against a positive subacromial injection test for impingement syndrome, and the findings of rotator cuff tears at arthroscopy.
The consultant and the registrar did not differ significantly in their assessments (paired t-test, p> 0.05). The highly sensitive tests have poor specificity. The most sensitive tests for impingement syndrome were the Hawkins’ sign (cons:100%, reg: 97%) and the Neer’s sign (cons: 94%, reg: 81%). The Hawkins’ sign also had high negative and positive predictive values. The painful arc and the drop arm tests both had low sensitivity and specificity. Testing the supraspinatus strength at 90 degrees abduction was more sensitive for full thickness cuff tear than testing strength of abduction initiation (cons: 100% vs 67%; reg: 90% vs 50%). These tests were poor at differentiating partial thickness tears from full thickness tears.
Our findings echoed the conclusions of other papers in that the Neer’s and Hawkins’ signs are the most sensitive for impingement syndrome. Testing the supraspinatus at 90 degrees abduction was more sensitive than abduction initiation for full thickness supraspinatus tear.
The abstracts were prepared by Mr Roger Emery. Correspondence should be addressed to him at the British Orthopaedic Association, Royal College of Surgeons, 35-43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PN
