The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American) 86:807-812 (2004)
© 2004 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
Diagnostic Values of Tests for Acromioclavicular Joint Pain
Judie Walton, BSc, PhD1,
Sanjeev Mahajan, MBBS, MS1,
Anastasios Paxinos, MBBS, FRACS1,
Jeanette Marshall, CNS1,
Carl Bryant, MBBS, DDR, FRACR1,
Ron Shnier, MBBS, FRACP1,
Richard Quinn, MBBS, FRACR1 and
George A.C. Murrell, MBBS, DPhil1
1 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery (J.W., S.M., A.P., J.M., and G.A.C.M), Mayne
Imaging (C.B. and R.S.), and Department of Nuclear Medicine (R.Q.), St. George
Hospital Campus, University of New South Wales, Kogarah, Sydney, New South
Wales 2217, Australia. E-mail address for G.A.C. Murrell:
murrell.g{at}ori.org.au
Investigation performed at Sports Medicine and Shoulder Service,
Orthopaedic Research Institute, St. George Hospital Campus, University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia
The authors did not receive grants or outside funding in support of their
research or preparation of this manuscript. They did not receive payments or
other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a
commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or
direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, educational
institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the
authors are affiliated or associated.
Background: This prospective study was performed to determine which
clinical and imaging tests were most helpful for diagnosing acromioclavicular
joint pain.
Methods: Of 1037 patients with shoulder pain, 113 who mapped pain
within an area bounded by the midpart of the clavicle and the deltoid
insertion were eligible for inclusion in the study. Forty-two subjects agreed
to participate, and four of them were lost to follow-up. Twenty clinical
tests, radiography, bone-scanning, magnetic resonance imaging, and an
acromioclavicular joint injection test were performed on all patients. The
patients were divided into two groups according to whether they had a 50%
decrease in pain following the acromioclavicular joint injection. Statistical
analysis, including multivariate regression analysis, was performed in order
to evaluate the diagnostic effectiveness of the various tests.
Results: Acromioclavicular joint pain was confirmed in twenty-eight
of the thirty-eight patients. The most sensitive tests were examination for
acromioclavicular tenderness (96% sensitivity), the Paxinos test (79%),
magnetic resonance imaging (85%), and bone-scanning (82%), but these studies
had low specificity. In the stepwise regression model, with the response to
the injection used as the dependent variable, bone-scanning and the Paxinos
test were the only independent variables retained. Patients with a positive
Paxinos test as well as a positive bone scan had high post-test odds (55:1)
and a 99% post-test probability of having pain due to pathological changes in
the acromioclavicular joint. The likelihood ratio for patients with one
negative test and one positive test was indeterminate (0.4:1). Patients with
both a negative Paxinos test and a negative bone scan had a likelihood ratio
of 0.03:1 for having acromioclavicular joint pain, which basically rules out
the disorder.
Conclusions: The highly sensitive tests had low specificity, and the
highly specific tests had low sensitivity. However, the combination of a
positive Paxinos test and a positive bone scan predicted damage to the
acromioclavicular joint as the cause of shoulder pain with a high degree of
confidence.
Level of Evidence: Diagnostic study, Level I-1 (testing
of previously developed diagnostic criteria in series of consecutive patients
[with universally applied reference "gold" standard]). See
Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
E J Hegedus, A Goode, S Campbell, A Morin, M Tamaddoni, C T Moorman III, and C Cook
Physical examination tests of the shoulder: a systematic review with meta-analysis of individual tests
Br. J. Sports Med.,
February 1, 2008;
42(2):
80 - 92.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. R. Walton, N. K. Bowman, Y. Khatib, J. Linklater, and G. A.C. Murrell
Restore Orthobiologic Implant: Not Recommended for Augmentation of Rotator Cuff Repairs
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.,
April 1, 2007;
89(4):
786 - 791.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. D. Mazzocca, R. A. Arciero, and J. Bicos
Evaluation and Treatment of Acromioclavicular Joint Injuries
Am. J. Sports Med.,
February 1, 2007;
35(2):
316 - 329.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Itoi, H. Minagawa, N. Yamamoto, N. Seki, and H. Abe
Are Pain Location and Physical Examinations Useful in Locating a Tear Site of the Rotator Cuff?
Am. J. Sports Med.,
February 1, 2006;
34(2):
256 - 264.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. B. Park, A. Yokota, H. S. Gill, G. El Rassi, and E. G. McFarland
Diagnostic Accuracy of Clinical Tests for the Different Degrees of Subacromial Impingement Syndrome
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.,
July 1, 2005;
87(7):
1446 - 1455.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|