Radiography of the acutely injured shoulder

Addition of the apical oblique projection increases the detection of acute traumatic shoulder abnormalities in adults

“…Plain radiography is recognized as the first-line imaging modality for evaluating shoulder pain and trauma due to its accessibility, low cost, short examination time, clinician familiarity, and suitability for assessing a broad range of abnormalities [1,2,3]. Plain radiographic evaluation of the shoulder requires a minimum of two projections performed perpendicular to each other, typically an anteroposterior (AP) and a type of lateral scapular or axillary projection [4,5]. To optimize visualization of shoulder anatomy on a variety of patient presentations, several plain radiographic projections can be adopted [6]; however, there is currently no consensus in the literature regarding the diagnostic performance of the different projections.…”

Imaging Review of Snowboard Injuries

“…The shoulder is examined radiographically using a (true) AP, scapular Y view, and ideally also an axial view because it has a higher diagnostic yield for subluxation and dislocations. 26 A routine axial projection of the shoulder can be technically difficult, however, and painful in the setting of acute trauma because the affected shoulder needs to be abducted with the elbow resting on the detector. For this reason, multiple variations of the standard axillary projection have been developed to minimize or eliminate shoulder abduction, such as the modified trauma axial and Velpeau view.…”

“…For this reason, multiple variations of the standard axillary projection have been developed to minimize or eliminate shoulder abduction, such as the modified trauma axial and Velpeau view. 26 Radiographic evaluation of the medial clavicle, and especially the sternoclavicular joint, can be challenging. CT is well suited to assess these locations.…”

Radiographic technique modification and evidence‐based practice: A qualitative study

“…There is a shortage of published research‐based evidence, which may explain why evidence‐based radiography is rarely adopted in practice 9,10 . There is a paucity of published research about image technique modification, for example, adaptation of the upper limb X‐ray views for severely injured patients, as well as a lack of evidence relating to general radiographic practices, such as source to image‐receptor distance 11–17 . Most of the published literature about evidence‐based radiography focuses on editorial or opinion articles rather than primary research.…”

“… 9 , 10 There is a paucity of published research about image technique modification, for example, adaptation of the upper limb X‐ray views for severely injured patients, as well as a lack of evidence relating to general radiographic practices, such as source to image‐receptor distance. 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 Most of the published literature about evidence‐based radiography focuses on editorial or opinion articles rather than primary research. The extent to which published literature is incorporated into Australian radiographic practice is also unclear.…”