Outcome measures in the management of gluteal tendinopathy: a systematic review of their measurement properties

ObjectiveEvaluate properties of outcome measures for gluteal tendinopathy.DesignMultistage scoping/systematic review.Data sourcesCochrane, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PEDro, CINAHL, SPORTDISCUS were searched (December 2021) to identify measures used to evaluate gluteal tendinopathy. Measures were mapped to the core health domains for tendinopathy. Medline, CINAHL, Embase and PubMed were searched (December 2021) for studies evaluating measurement properties of gluteal tendinopathy outcome measures captured in the initial search. Both reviews included studies that evaluated a treatment in participants with gluteal tendinopathy, diagnosed by a professional. Consensus-based-Standards for the Selection of Health Instruments methodology were followed—including bias assessment and synthesis of findings.ResultsSix studies reported on the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment—Gluteal Tendinopathy (VISA-G). One study reported on the Hip Outcome Score (HOS)—activities of daily living (ADL) and Sport.The VISA-G had moderate-quality evidence of sufficient construct validity (known group) and responsiveness (pre–post intervention), low-quality evidence of sufficient reliability, measurement error, comprehensibility and insufficient construct validity (convergent), and very low-quality evidence of sufficient comprehensiveness, relevance and responsiveness (comparison with other outcome measures).Both the HOS(ADL) and HOS(Sport) had very low-quality evidence of sufficient reliability, relevance and insufficient construct validity and comprehensiveness. The HOS(ADL) had very low-quality evidence of sufficient comprehensibility and insufficient measurement error. The HOS(Sport) had very low quality evidence of inconsistent comprehensibility and sufficient measurement error.ConclusionRigorously validated outcome measures for gluteal tendinopathy are lacking. The VISA-G is the preferred available option to capture the disability associated with gluteal tendinopathy.</jats:sec

Consensus recommendations on the classification, definition and diagnostic criteria of hip-related pain in young and middle-aged active adults from the International Hip-related Pain Research Network, Zurich 2018.

There is no agreement on how to classify, define or diagnose hip-related pain-a common cause of hip and groin pain in young and middle-aged active adults. This complicates the work of clinicians and researchers. The International Hip-related Pain Research Network consensus group met in November 2018 in Zurich aiming to make recommendations on how to classify, define and diagnose hip disease in young and middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain as the main symptom. Prior to the meeting we performed a scoping review of electronic databases in June 2018 to determine the definition, epidemiology and diagnosis of hip conditions in young and middle-aged active adults presenting with hip-related pain. We developed and presented evidence-based statements for these to a panel of 37 experts for discussion and consensus agreement. Both non-musculoskeletal and serious hip pathological conditions (eg, tumours, infections, stress fractures, slipped capital femoral epiphysis), as well as competing musculoskeletal conditions (eg, lumbar spine) should be excluded when diagnosing hip-related pain in young and middle-aged active adults. The most common hip conditions in young and middle-aged active adults presenting with hip-related pain are: (1) femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome, (2) acetabular dysplasia and/or hip instability and (3) other conditions without a distinct osseous morphology (labral, chondral and/or ligamentum teres conditions), and that these terms are used in research and clinical practice. Clinical examination and diagnostic imaging have limited diagnostic utility; a comprehensive approach is therefore essential. A negative flexion-adduction-internal rotation test helps rule out hip-related pain although its clinical utility is limited. Anteroposterior pelvis and lateral femoral head-neck radiographs are the initial diagnostic imaging of choice-advanced imaging should be performed only when requiring additional detail of bony or soft-tissue morphology (eg, for definitive diagnosis, research setting or when planning surgery). We recommend clear, detailed and consistent methodology of bony morphology outcome measures (definition, measurement and statistical reporting) in research. Future research on conditions with hip-related pain as the main symptom should include high-quality prospective studies on aetiology and prognosis. The most common hip conditions in active adults presenting with hip-related pain are: (1) FAI syndrome, (2) acetabular dysplasia and/or hip instability and (3) other conditions without distinct osseous morphology including labral, chondral and/or ligamentum teres conditions. The last category should not be confused with the incidental imaging findings of labral, chondral and/or ligamentum teres pathology in asymptomatic people. Future research should refine our current recommendations by determining the clinical utility of clinical examination and diagnostic imaging in prospective studies