An international, multicenter cohort study comparing 6 shoulder clinical scores in an asymptomatic population.

HYPOTHESIS: The study purpose was to assess 6 shoulder patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) values in asymptomatic, healthy, pathology-free individuals. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in PROM values in pathology-free individuals when considering sex, age, ethnicity, and geographical location. METHODS: Electronic questionnaires were completed by 635 individuals (323 Australians and 312 Canadians) without dominant shoulder pathology for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score; Constant-Murley Shoulder Score (CSS); Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS); University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder score; Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI); and Stanmore Percentage of Normal Shoulder Assessment (SPONSA). Shoulder range of motion and strength were assessed. RESULTS: No difference was identified between subjective-only and subjective-objective PROMs. Handedness and a current elbow or wrist problem were not associated with differences in PROM values. Poorer PROM values were associated with a history of an inactive shoulder problem and increasing age. Female participants tended to report similar or poorer PROM scores. No significant difference was found between ethnicities. Geographical location was associated with differences in the ASES shoulder score, UCLA shoulder score, and SPADI but not the CSS, SPONSA, and OSS. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in sex, age, and geographical location will affect PROM shoulder scores in pathology-free individuals and should be taken into consideration when PROMs are being used to compare patient outcomes. This study has established normative values for the ASES shoulder score, CSS, OSS, UCLA shoulder score, SPADI, and SPONSA. Future studies assessing a pathologic patient cohort should perform comparisons against a sex- and age-matched control cohort, ideally sourced from the same geographical location.

Testing the Hip Abductor Muscle Strength of Older Persons Using a Handheld Dynamometer.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the reliability of a clinically applicable method of dynamometry to assess and monitor hip abductor muscle strength in older persons. DESIGN: Bilateral isometric hip abductor muscle strength measured with a handheld dynamometer, patients supine with the contralateral hip positioned directly against a wall for stabilization. Reliability determined by comparing intra-assessor and inter-assessor results and comparison to a criterion standard (stabilized dynamometer with patients in the standing position). SETTING: UniSA Nutritional Physiology Research Centre. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-one patients older than 65 years were recruited from the Royal Adelaide Hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), bias, and limits of agreement calculated to determine reliability. RESULTS: Intra-assessor and inter-assessor ICCs were high (0.94 and 0.92-0.94, respectively). There was no intra-assessor bias and narrow limits of agreement (±2.4%). There was a small inter-assessor bias but narrow limits of agreement (0.6%-0.9% and ± 2.3%, respectively). There was a wide variation comparing results to the criterion standard (±5.0%-5.2% limits of agreement), highlighting problems attributed to difficulties that the test population had with the standing position used in the criterion standard test. CONCLUSIONS: Testing older persons' hip abductor muscle strength while in the supine position with optimal pelvic stabilization using a handheld dynamometer is highly reliable. While further studies must be done to assess patients with specific pathologies, this test has potential application to monitor and evaluate the effects of surgical interventions and/or rehabilitation protocols for a variety of conditions affecting hip abductor function such as hip fractures and arthritis.