Validity of Clinical Measurement Instruments Assessing Scapular Function: Insufficient Evidence to Recommend Any Instrument for Assessing Scapular Posture, Movement, and Dysfunction-A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the construct validity, criterion validity, and responsiveness of measurement instruments evaluating scapular function. DESIGN: Systematic review of measurement properties. LITERATURE SEARCH: The MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus databases were systematically searched from inception until March 2019. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies published in Dutch, English, or German were included when they evaluated at least 1 of the measurement properties of interest. No restrictions were made regarding participants' health status. DATA SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently evaluated study quality using the COSMIN checklist and extracted and analyzed data. Quality of evidence was graded by measurement property for each distinctive type of measurement. RESULTS: Thirty-one measurement instruments in 14 studies were categorized into instruments to measure scapular posture and movement, and to assess scapular dyskinesis. Quality of evidence was at most moderate for 4 instruments with respect to criterion validity. Of these, criterion validity for instruments measuring scapular protraction/retraction posture and rotation angles up to 120° of thoracohumeral elevation was sufficient. Criterion validity for instruments measuring asymmetrical scapular posture, range of motion, and the lateral scapular slide test was insufficient. Quality of evidence for measurement properties of all other instruments was graded lower. CONCLUSION: There is currently insufficient evidence to recommend any instrument for the clinical examination of scapular function. Measurement instruments to assess scapular dyskinesis are prone to misinterpretation and should therefore not be used as such. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2020;50(11):632-641. doi:10.2519/jospt.2020.9265.

WITHDRAWN: Orthotic devices for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Patellofemoral pain syndrome is a frequently reported condition in active adults. A wide variety of conservative treatment strategies have been described. As yet, no optimal strategy has been identified. Application of orthotic devices e.g. knee braces, knee straps, forms of taping of the knee, active training devices, knee sleeves and inlay soles to support the foot have been advocated to treat this condition. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of foot and knee orthotics for treatment of patellofemoral pain syndrome. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials register (Issue 2, 2000), MEDLINE (January 1966 to March 2000; EMBASE (January 1988 to March 2000); CINAHL (January 1982 to March 2000) and PEDro (up to March 2000). Relevant orthotic companies were contacted. The date of the most recent search was May 2000. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing the effectiveness of knee or foot orthotics for treatment of patellofemoral pain syndrome were selected. Trials describing the use of orthotic devices in conjunction with operative treatment were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three reviewers independently assessed methodological quality of the identified trials by use of a modified version of the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group assessment tool, consisting of 11 items. Two reviewers extracted data without blinding. Trialists were contacted to obtain missing data. MAIN RESULTS: Five trials involving 362 participants were included in this review. Five other trials await possible inclusion if further information can be obtained. Due to clinical heterogeneity, we refrained from statistical pooling and conducted analysis by grading the strength of scientific evidence. The level of obtained research-based evidence was graded as limited as all trials were of low methodological quality.This limited research-based evidence showed the Protonics brace at six week follow-up was significantly more effective for decrease in pain (weighted mean difference (WMD) between groups 3.2; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.8 to 3.6), functional improvement on the Kujala score (WMD 45.6; 95% CI 43.4 to 47.7) and change in patellofemoral congruence angle (WMD 17.2; 95% CI 14.1 to 20.3) when compared to no treatment. A comprehensive programme including tape application was significantly superior to a monitored exercise programme without tape application for decrease in worst pain (WMD 1.6; 95% CI 0.4 to 2.8) and usual pain (WMD 1.2; 95% CI 0.2 to 2.1), and clinical change and functional improvement questionnaire scores at four weeks follow-up.The trials reported statistically significant differences in patient satisfaction after applied therapy (WMD 3.3; 95% CI 0.5 to 6.1) in favour of the McConnell regimen compared with the Coumans bandage at six weeks follow-up. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence from randomised controlled trials is currently too limited to draw definitive conclusions about the use of knee and foot orthotics for the treatment of patellofemoral pain. Future high quality trials in this field are warranted.

Reliability of Performance-Based Clinical Measurements to Assess Shoulder Girdle Kinematics and Positioning: Systematic Review.

Background: Deviant shoulder girdle movement is suggested as an eminent factor in the etiology of shoulder pain. Reliable measurements of shoulder girdle kinematics are a prerequisite for optimizing clinical management strategies. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability, measurement error, and internal consistency of measurements with performance-based clinical tests for shoulder girdle kinematics and positioning in patients with shoulder pain. Data Sources: The MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus databases were systematically searched from inception to August 2015. Study Selection: Articles published in Dutch, English, or German were included if they involved the evaluation of at least one of the measurement properties of interest. Data Extraction: Two reviewers independently evaluated the methodological quality per studied measurement property with the 4-point-rating scale of the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) checklist, extracted data, and assessed the adequacy of the measurement properties. Data Synthesis: Forty studies comprising more than 30 clinical tests were included. Actual reported measurements of the tests were categorized into: (1) positional measurement methods, (2) measurement methods to determine dynamic characteristics, and (3) tests to diagnose impairments of shoulder girdle function. Best evidence synthesis of the tests was performed per measurement for each measurement property. Limitations: All studies had significant limitations, including incongruence between test description and actual reported measurements and a lack of reporting on minimal important change. In general, the methodological quality of the selected studies was fair to poor. Conclusions: High-quality evidence indicates that measurements obtained with the Modified Scapular Assistance Test are not reliable for clinical use. Sound recommendations for the use of other tests could not be made due to inadequate evidence. Across studies, diversity in description, performance, and interpretation of similar tests was present, and different criteria were used to establish similar diagnoses, mostly without taking into account a clinically meaningful context. Consequently, these tests lack face validity, which hampers their clinical use. Further research on validity and how to integrate a clinically meaningful context of movement into clinical tests is warranted.