» Articles » PMID: 33709009

Impact of Body Mass Index on the Accuracy of Physical Examination and MRI of the Shoulder

Overview
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2021 Mar 12
PMID 33709009
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The physical examination of overweight patients can require specific adaptations. Orthopaedic literature on the impact of body mass index (BMI) on the physical examination of the shoulder is virtually nonexistent.

Purpose: To assess whether BMI affects the sensitivity and specificity of common shoulder tests, using arthroscopy as a gold standard. We also examined the effects of BMI on the sensitivity and specificity of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the shoulder for reference.

Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2.

Methods: We analyzed the data of 116 consecutive patients who underwent shoulder arthroscopy for the treatment of rotator cuff tears, Bankart lesions, and superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) lesions. Preoperative BMI, physical examination of the shoulder findings, and MRI findings were extracted. Contingency tables and receiver operating characteristic curves were used to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of provocative tests of the shoulder and MRI as well as their relationship to BMI.

Results: The sensitivity and specificity of the Jobe supraspinatus test were 77.8% and 72.7% in patients with BMI ≤25, 82.6% and 70.6% in those with 25 < BMI ≤ 30, and 81.3% and 55.6% in those with BMI >30, respectively ( < .001). The apprehension and relocation tests demonstrated higher sensitivity and specificity for the overweight patients (25 < BMI ≤ 30) compared with the other BMI groups, with a sensitivity and specificity of 83.3% and 100% for the apprehension test and a sensitivity and specificity of 75% and 100% for the relocation test, respectively. The O'Brien, Speed, and Ebinger tests for SLAP tears had low accuracy and did not yield statistically significant results. MRI interpretation was found to be influenced by BMI in obese patients, especially when SLAP lesions were assessed.

Conclusion: Counterintuitively, tests for shoulder instability had greater specificity in overweight patients and should be encouraged, particularly in obese patients, in whom the specificity of shoulder MRI for the detection of a Bankart lesion is lower. The Jobe test was more sensitive but less specific in overweight patients. These findings may assist care providers in improving the interpretation of the shoulder examination of overweight patients and consequently lead to better treatment-related decisions.

Citing Articles

The long head of biceps at the shoulder: a scoping review.

Diplock B, Hing W, Marks D BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023; 24(1):232.

PMID: 36978047 PMC: 10044783. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-023-06346-5.


Magnetic Resonance Imaging Manifestations of Pediatric Purulent Meningitis Based on Immune Clustering Algorithm.

Wei D, He P, Guo Q, Huang Y, Yan H Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2022; 2022:9751620.

PMID: 35350702 PMC: 8930259. DOI: 10.1155/2022/9751620.

References
1.
Hermans J, Luime J, Meuffels D, Reijman M, Simel D, Bierma-Zeinstra S . Does this patient with shoulder pain have rotator cuff disease?: The Rational Clinical Examination systematic review. JAMA. 2013; 310(8):837-47. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.276187. View

2.
Williams Jr J, Simel D . The rational clinical examination. Does this patient have ascites? How to divine fluid in the abdomen. JAMA. 1992; 267(19):2645-8. DOI: 10.1001/jama.267.19.2645. View

3.
Sgroi M, Loitsch T, Reichel H, Kappe T . Diagnostic Value of Clinical Tests for Supraspinatus Tendon Tears. Arthroscopy. 2018; 34(8):2326-2333. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2018.03.030. View

4.
Chagpar A, McMasters K, Saul J, Nurko J, Martin 2nd R, Scoggins C . Body mass index influences palpability but not stage of breast cancer at diagnosis. Am Surg. 2007; 73(6):555-60. View

5.
Jain N, Luz J, Higgins L, Dong Y, Warner J, Matzkin E . The Diagnostic Accuracy of Special Tests for Rotator Cuff Tear: The ROW Cohort Study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2016; 96(3):176-183. PMC: 5218987. DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000566. View