Physical examination of the elbow, what is the evidence? A systematic literature review

Objective Primary to provide an overview of diagnostic accuracy for clinical tests for common elbow (sport) injuries, secondary accompanied by reproducible instructions to perform these tests. Design A systematic literature review according to the PRISMA statement. Data sources A comprehensive literature search was performed in MEDLINE via PubMed and EMBASE. Eligibility criteria We included studies reporting diagnostic accuracy and a description on the performance for elbow tests, targeting the following conditions: distal biceps rupture, triceps rupture, posteromedial impingement, medial collateral ligament (MCL) insufficiency, posterolateral rotatory instability (PLRI), lateral epicondylitis and medial epicondylitis. After identifying the articles, the methodological quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 checklist. Results Our primary literature search yielded 1144 hits. After assessment 10 articles were included: six for distal biceps rupture, one for MCL insufficiency, two for PLRI and one for lateral epicondylitis. No articles were selected for triceps rupture, posteromedial impingement and medial epicondylitis. Quality assessment showed high or unclear risk of bias in nine studies. We described 24 test procedures of which 14 tests contained data on diagnostic accuracy. Conclusions Numerous clinical tests for the elbow were described in literature, seldom accompanied with data on diagnostic accuracy. None of the described tests can provide adequate certainty to rule in or rule out a disease based on sufficient diagnostic accuracy

Distal Biceps Tendon Ruptures: Diagnostic Strategy Through Physical Examination

Background: Distinguishing a complete from a partial distal biceps tendon rupture is essential, as a complete rupture may require repair on short notice to restore function, whereas partial ruptures can be treated nonsurgically in most cases. Reliability of physical examination is crucial to determine the right workup and treatment in patients with a distal biceps tendon rupture. Purposes: The primary aim of this study was to find a (combination of) test(s) that serves best to diagnose a complete rupture with certainty in the acute phase (≤1 month) without missing any complete ruptures. The secondary aims were to determine the best (combination of) test(s) to identify a chronic (>1 month) rupture of the distal biceps tendon and indicate additional imaging in case partial ruptures or tendinitis are suspected. Study Design: Cohort study (Diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A total of 86 patients with anterior elbow complaints or suspected distal biceps injury underwent standardized physical examination, including the Hook test, passive forearm pronation test, biceps crease interval (BCI), and biceps crease ratio. Diagnosis was confirmed intraoperatively (68 cases), by magnetic resonance imaging (13 cases), or by ultrasound (5 cases). Results: A combination of the Hook test and BCI (ie, both tests are positive) was most accurate for both acute and chronic ruptures but with a different purpose. For acute complete ruptures, sensitivity was 94% and specificity was 100%. In chronic cases, specificity was also 100%. Weakness on active supination and palpation of the tendon footprint provided excellent sensitivity of 100% for chronic complete ruptures and partial ruptures, respectively. Conclusion: The combination of a positive Hook test and BCI serves best to accurately diagnose acute complete ruptures of the distal biceps tendon. Weakness on active supination and pain on palpation of the tendon footprint provide excellent sensitivity for chronic complete ruptures and partial ruptures. Using these tests in all suspected distal biceps ruptures allows a physician to refrain from imaging for a diagnostic purpose in certain cases, to limit treatment delay and thereby provide better treatment outcome, and to avoid hospital and social costs

The reliability and validity of goniometric elbow measurements in adults: A systematic review of the literature

Background: The universal goniometer is a simple measuring tool. With this review we aimed to investigate the reliability and validity of the universal goniometer in measurements of the adults' elbow. Methods: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were followed and our study protocol was published online at PROSPERO. A literature search was conducted on relevant studies. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Appraisal of Diagnostic Reliability (QAREL) scoring system. Results: Out of 697 studies yielded from our literature search, 12 were included. Six studies were rated as high quality. The intrarater reliability intraclass correlation coefficient ranged from 0.45 to 0.99, the interrater reliability ranged from intraclass correlation coefficient 0.53–0.97. One study providing instructions on goniometric alignment did not find a difference in expert versus non-expert examiners. Another study in which examiners were not instructed found a higher interrater reliability in expert examiners. One study investigating the validity of the goniometer in elbow measurements found a maximum standard error of the mean of 11.5° for total range of motion. Discussion: Overall, the studies showed high intra- and interrater reliability of the universal goniometer. The reliability of the universal goniometer in non-expert examiners can be increased by clear instructions on goniometric alignment

Validity and Reliability of Elbow Range of Motion Measurements Using Digital Photographs, Movies, and a Goniometry Smartphone Application

Introduction. Range of motion (ROM) is closely monitored before and after surgery for stiff elbow and during rehabilitation. Measurements in the home environment may be helpful to increase involvement and adherence of the patient. Therefore, our objective is to investigate the validity and inter- and intraobserver reliability of 3 alternative methods to assess the ROM by the patient in a home-based situation, in comparison to the universal goniometer (UG). We hypothesize that all 3 alternative methods will be valid alternatives and show a level of reliability equivalent to UG. Methods. Goniometric measurements of elbow flexion, extension, pronation and supination using photography, movie, and a smartphone application were obtained. The validity of these measurement methods was compared to UG. The interobserver and intraobserver reliability were calculated for all measurement methods. Results. Photography and movie based goniometry of the elbow showed good validity in flexion and extension. The interobserver and intraobserver reliability were found to be good to excellent for photo and movie but moderate to poor for UG and the smartphone application. Conclusions. Photo or movie based goniometry seems to be a useful option for initial and follow-up measurement of the elbow ROM, both in the outpatient clinic and in a home environment. Based on our study, the smartphone application we used is not recommended