Intertester reliability of a movement impairment-based classification system for individuals with shoulder pain.

Pub Date : 2020-06-01 Epub Date: 2020-01-28 DOI:10.1142/S1013702520500067
Patitta Torwichien, Mantana Vongsirinavarat, Prasert Sakulsriprasert, Sirikarn Somprasong
{"title":"Intertester reliability of a movement impairment-based classification system for individuals with shoulder pain.","authors":"Patitta Torwichien,&nbsp;Mantana Vongsirinavarat,&nbsp;Prasert Sakulsriprasert,&nbsp;Sirikarn Somprasong","doi":"10.1142/S1013702520500067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Other than pathoanatomical diagnosis, physical therapy managements need the diagnosis of movement-related impairments for guiding treatment interventions. The classification system of the Movement System Impairment (MSI) has been adopted to label the musculoskeletal disorders in physical therapy practice. However, reliability study of this classification system in individuals with shoulder pain has not been reported in the literature.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This paper investigated the intertester reliability of the diagnosis based on the MSI classification system in individuals with shoulder pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The patients with shoulder pain, between the ages 18-60 years, were recruited if he or she had pain between 30 and 70 on the 100 mm visual analog scale for at least three months. The examiners who were two physical therapists with different clinical experiences received a standardized training program. They independently examined 45 patients in random order. Each patient was examined by both therapists on the same day. The standardized examination scheme based on the MSI approach was used. Patients were identified to subgroup syndromes according to scapular and humeral syndromes and also determining their subcategory syndromes. Six scapular subcategory syndromes included downward rotated, depressed, abducted, wing, internal rotated/anterior tilted, and elevated. Three humeral subcategory syndromes were anterior glide, superior glide, and medial rotated. More than one subgroup and subcategory of syndromes could be identified in each patient. The test results of each session were blinded to another therapist. The percentages of agreement and kappa statistic were determined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results showed that agreement levels in identifying subgroup syndromes was fair (71.11% agreement, kappa coefficient <math><mo>=</mo></math> 0.34) and classifying subcategories syndromes were poor to substantial (73.33-91.11% agreement, kappa coefficient <math><mo>=</mo></math> 0.20 <math><mo>-</mo></math> 0.66). The overall agreement and kappa value of the MSI classification of subcategory syndromes was poor (kappa coefficient <math><mo>=</mo></math> 0.11; 95% CI 0.05-0.18). The agreement level of subcategories for scapular depression and humeral superior glide syndromes was substantial. The scapular winging, depression, and downward rotation were the three syndromes that were most frequently identified by both the examiners.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The intertester reliability between therapists with different experience according to the MSI approach for shoulder pain classification was generally acceptable to poor due to the nature of the classification system. The standardized procedure and intensive training can be used for inculcating novice therapists with adequate level of intertester reliability of examination.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1142/S1013702520500067","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1142/S1013702520500067","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Other than pathoanatomical diagnosis, physical therapy managements need the diagnosis of movement-related impairments for guiding treatment interventions. The classification system of the Movement System Impairment (MSI) has been adopted to label the musculoskeletal disorders in physical therapy practice. However, reliability study of this classification system in individuals with shoulder pain has not been reported in the literature.

Objective: This paper investigated the intertester reliability of the diagnosis based on the MSI classification system in individuals with shoulder pain.

Methods: The patients with shoulder pain, between the ages 18-60 years, were recruited if he or she had pain between 30 and 70 on the 100 mm visual analog scale for at least three months. The examiners who were two physical therapists with different clinical experiences received a standardized training program. They independently examined 45 patients in random order. Each patient was examined by both therapists on the same day. The standardized examination scheme based on the MSI approach was used. Patients were identified to subgroup syndromes according to scapular and humeral syndromes and also determining their subcategory syndromes. Six scapular subcategory syndromes included downward rotated, depressed, abducted, wing, internal rotated/anterior tilted, and elevated. Three humeral subcategory syndromes were anterior glide, superior glide, and medial rotated. More than one subgroup and subcategory of syndromes could be identified in each patient. The test results of each session were blinded to another therapist. The percentages of agreement and kappa statistic were determined.

Results: The results showed that agreement levels in identifying subgroup syndromes was fair (71.11% agreement, kappa coefficient = 0.34) and classifying subcategories syndromes were poor to substantial (73.33-91.11% agreement, kappa coefficient = 0.20 - 0.66). The overall agreement and kappa value of the MSI classification of subcategory syndromes was poor (kappa coefficient = 0.11; 95% CI 0.05-0.18). The agreement level of subcategories for scapular depression and humeral superior glide syndromes was substantial. The scapular winging, depression, and downward rotation were the three syndromes that were most frequently identified by both the examiners.

Conclusion: The intertester reliability between therapists with different experience according to the MSI approach for shoulder pain classification was generally acceptable to poor due to the nature of the classification system. The standardized procedure and intensive training can be used for inculcating novice therapists with adequate level of intertester reliability of examination.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
基于运动障碍的肩部疼痛分类系统的测试者间可靠性。
背景:除了病理解剖诊断外,物理治疗管理还需要对运动相关损伤的诊断来指导治疗干预。在物理治疗实践中,运动系统损伤(MSI)分类系统已被用于肌肉骨骼疾病的标记。然而,该分类系统在肩关节疼痛患者中的可靠性研究尚未见文献报道。目的:探讨基于MSI分类系统诊断肩痛的测试者间信度。方法:招募年龄在18-60岁之间的肩痛患者,如果他或她在100毫米视觉模拟量表上疼痛在30 - 70之间至少三个月。主考官是两位具有不同临床经验的物理治疗师,他们接受了标准化的培训计划。他们独立地按随机顺序检查了45名患者。每位患者在同一天接受了两位治疗师的检查。采用基于MSI方法的标准化考试方案。根据肩胛骨和肱骨综合征将患者划分为亚组综合征,并确定其亚类综合征。6种肩胛骨亚类综合征包括向下旋转、凹陷、外展、翅状、内旋转/前倾斜和升高。三个肱骨亚类综合征分别为前滑脱、上滑脱和内侧旋转。在每个患者中可以确定多个亚组和亚类别的综合征。每个疗程的测试结果都对另一位治疗师保密。测定一致性百分比和kappa统计量。结果:两组患者对亚组证候的识别一致性水平尚可(一致性71.11%,kappa系数= 0.34),对亚组证候的分类一致性水平从差到高(一致性73.33 ~ 91.11%,kappa系数= 0.20 ~ 0.66)。各亚类证候的MSI分型总体一致性和kappa值较差(kappa系数= 0.11;95% ci 0.05-0.18)。肩胛骨凹陷和肱骨上滑综合征的亚分类一致。肩胛骨翅状、凹陷和向下旋转是两名检查人员最常发现的三种综合征。结论:由于MSI分类系统的性质,不同经验的治疗师使用MSI方法进行肩痛分类时,测者间信度总体可接受,但较差。标准化的程序和强化的培训可以用来灌输新手治疗师与测试者之间的足够水平的可靠性。
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
×
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