Is the YES/NO classification accurate in screening scapular dyskinesis in asymptomatic individuals? - A novel validation study utilizing surface electromyography as a surrogate measure in identifying movement asymmetries.

IF 1.6 Q2 REHABILITATION Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy Pub Date : 2024-12-05 DOI:10.1080/10669817.2024.2436402
Lawrence S Ramiscal, Lori A Bolgla, Chad E Cook, John S Magel, Stephen A Parada, Raymond Chong
{"title":"Is the YES/NO classification accurate in screening scapular dyskinesis in asymptomatic individuals? - A novel validation study utilizing surface electromyography as a surrogate measure in identifying movement asymmetries.","authors":"Lawrence S Ramiscal, Lori A Bolgla, Chad E Cook, John S Magel, Stephen A Parada, Raymond Chong","doi":"10.1080/10669817.2024.2436402","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Scapular dyskinesis is a known risk factor for shoulder pain, making it important to screen for prevention. Physical therapists screen scapular dyskinesis by visually comparing asymmetries in scapular movement during overhead reach using the Scapular Dyskinesis Test Yes/No classification (Y/N). Although scapular kinematics has been used to quantify scapular dyskinesis, current measurement techniques are inaccurate. Optimal scapular muscle activity is crucial for normal shoulder function and is measured using surface electromyography (sEMG). Research suggests that impaired scapular muscles can lead to scapular dyskinesis. Despite kinematics being a poor reference standard, there is currently no validated method to identify movement asymmetries using muscle activity as an alternative. We utilized sEMG to establish Y/N's validity. We hypothesized that Y/N is a valid tool using sEMG as a viable surrogate measure for identifying scapular dyskinesis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We employed a known-groups (symmetrical vs. asymmetrical shoulders) validity design following the Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies. Seventy-two asymptomatic subjects were evaluated using Y/N as the index test and sEMG as the reference standard. We created a criterion to assign the sEMG as the reference standard to establish the known groups. We calculated the sensitivity (Sn), specificity (Sp), positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), likelihood ratios (LR+, LR-), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) using a 2 × 2 table analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The diagnostic accuracy values were Sn = 0.56 (0.37-0.74), Sp = 0.36 (0.08-0.65), PPV = 0.68 (0.49-0.88), NPV = 0.25 (0.04-0.46), LR+ = 0.87 (0.50-1.53), and LR- = 1.22 (0.50-2.97).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Y/N's diagnostic accuracy was poor against the sEMG, suggesting clinicians should rely less on Y/N to screen scapular dyskinesis in the asymptomatic population. Our study demonstrated that sEMG might be a suitable alternative as a reference standard in validating methods designed to screen movement asymmetries.</p>","PeriodicalId":47319,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10669817.2024.2436402","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Scapular dyskinesis is a known risk factor for shoulder pain, making it important to screen for prevention. Physical therapists screen scapular dyskinesis by visually comparing asymmetries in scapular movement during overhead reach using the Scapular Dyskinesis Test Yes/No classification (Y/N). Although scapular kinematics has been used to quantify scapular dyskinesis, current measurement techniques are inaccurate. Optimal scapular muscle activity is crucial for normal shoulder function and is measured using surface electromyography (sEMG). Research suggests that impaired scapular muscles can lead to scapular dyskinesis. Despite kinematics being a poor reference standard, there is currently no validated method to identify movement asymmetries using muscle activity as an alternative. We utilized sEMG to establish Y/N's validity. We hypothesized that Y/N is a valid tool using sEMG as a viable surrogate measure for identifying scapular dyskinesis.

Methods: We employed a known-groups (symmetrical vs. asymmetrical shoulders) validity design following the Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies. Seventy-two asymptomatic subjects were evaluated using Y/N as the index test and sEMG as the reference standard. We created a criterion to assign the sEMG as the reference standard to establish the known groups. We calculated the sensitivity (Sn), specificity (Sp), positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), likelihood ratios (LR+, LR-), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) using a 2 × 2 table analysis.

Results: The diagnostic accuracy values were Sn = 0.56 (0.37-0.74), Sp = 0.36 (0.08-0.65), PPV = 0.68 (0.49-0.88), NPV = 0.25 (0.04-0.46), LR+ = 0.87 (0.50-1.53), and LR- = 1.22 (0.50-2.97).

Conclusion: The Y/N's diagnostic accuracy was poor against the sEMG, suggesting clinicians should rely less on Y/N to screen scapular dyskinesis in the asymptomatic population. Our study demonstrated that sEMG might be a suitable alternative as a reference standard in validating methods designed to screen movement asymmetries.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
YES/NO分类在无症状个体中筛查肩胛骨运动障碍准确吗?-一项新的验证研究,利用表面肌电图作为识别运动不对称的替代措施。
背景:肩胛骨运动障碍是已知的肩部疼痛的危险因素,因此筛查预防是很重要的。物理治疗师使用肩胛骨运动障碍测试是/否分类(Y/N),通过视觉比较头顶伸展时肩胛骨运动不对称来筛查肩胛骨运动障碍。虽然肩胛骨运动学已被用于量化肩胛骨运动障碍,但目前的测量技术是不准确的。最佳的肩胛肌活动对正常的肩部功能至关重要,并使用表面肌电图(sEMG)进行测量。研究表明,肩胛骨肌肉受损可导致肩胛骨运动障碍。尽管运动学是一个很差的参考标准,但目前还没有有效的方法来识别运动不对称,使用肌肉活动作为替代。我们利用表面肌电信号来确定Y/N的有效性。我们假设Y/N是一个有效的工具,使用肌电图作为识别肩胛骨运动障碍的可行替代措施。方法:我们采用已知组(对称肩与不对称肩)效度设计,遵循诊断准确性研究报告标准。以Y/N为指标,表面肌电信号为参考标准,对72例无症状者进行评价。我们创建了一个标准来分配表面肌电信号作为建立已知组的参考标准。采用2 × 2表分析法计算敏感性(Sn)、特异性(Sp)、阳性预测值和阴性预测值(PPV、NPV)、似然比(LR+、LR-)和诊断优势比(DOR)。结果:诊断精度值Sn = 0.56(0.37 - -0.74)、Sp = 0.36 (0.08 - -0.65), PPV = 0.68(0.49 - -0.88),净现值= 0.25 (0.04 - -0.46),LR + = 0.87(0.50 - -1.53),和LR - = 1.22(0.50 - -2.97)。结论:Y/N对肌电图的诊断准确性较差,提示临床医生应减少对无症状人群肩胛骨运动障碍的Y/N筛查。我们的研究表明,肌电图可能是一个合适的替代方案,作为一个参考标准,以验证设计筛选运动不对称的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
20.00%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: The Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy is an international peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the publication of original research, case reports, and reviews of the literature that contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of manual therapy, clinical research, therapeutic practice, and academic training. In addition, each issue features an editorial written by the editor or a guest editor, media reviews, thesis reviews, and abstracts of current literature. Areas of interest include: •Thrust and non-thrust manipulation •Neurodynamic assessment and treatment •Diagnostic accuracy and classification •Manual therapy-related interventions •Clinical decision-making processes •Understanding clinimetrics for the clinician
期刊最新文献
Cervicothoracic junction mobilization versus autogenic muscle energy technique for chronic mechanical neck pain: A randomized controlled trial. Short-term effectiveness of dry needling on pain and ankle range of motion in athletes with medial tibial stress syndrome- a randomized control trial. Spinal mobilization in infants reconsidered. Author response to Eric Saedt "Spinal mobilization in infants reconsidered". Tendential and unscientific opinion regarding spinal manipulative therapy in the pediatric population.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1