Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the simple shoulder test: Psychometric properties by age and injury type

Godfrey, Jenna; Hamman, Richard F.; Lowenstein, Steven R.; Briggs, Karen K.; Kocher, Mininder S.

doi:10.1016/j.jse.2006.07.003

Cited by 209 publications

(156 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(30 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

145

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The SST was developed by the shoulder service at the University of Washington (Seattle, WA, USA) [19]. It is a quick, subjective questionnaire composed of 12 questions with yes or no response options, and has been reported to be reliable, valid, and responsive [10]. For each question, the patient indicates whether he or she is able to perform the activity.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

To What Degree do Shoulder Outcome Instruments Reflect Patients’ Psychologic Distress?

Roh

Noh

et al. 2012

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Psychologic distress contributes to symptom severity in patients with several musculoskeletal disorders. While numerous shoulder outcome instruments are used it is unclear whether and to what degree psychologic distress contributes to the scores. Questions/purposes We asked (1) to what degree shoulder outcome instruments reflect patients' psychologic distress, and (2) whether patients who are strongly affected by psychologic distress can be identified. Methods We prospectively evaluated 119 patients with chronic shoulder pain caused by degenerative or inflammatory disorders using the Constant-Murley scale, Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. To evaluate psychologic distress, we measured depression using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression (CES-D) scale and pain anxiety using the Pain Anxiety Symptom Scale (PASS). Demographic and clinical parameters, such as pain scores, ROM, and abduction strength, also were measured. We then assessed the relative contributions made by psychologic distress and other clinical parameters to the quantitative ratings of the three shoulder outcome instruments. Results Quantitative ratings of shoulder outcome instruments correlated differently with psychologic distress. Constant-Murley scores did not correlate with psychologic measures, whereas SST scores correlated with PASS (r = 0.32) and DASH scores correlated with PASS and CES-D (r = 0.36 and r = 0.32). Psychologic distress contributed to worsening SST and DASH scores but not to Constant-Murley scores. DASH scores were more strongly influenced by pain anxiety and depression than the other two outcome instruments. Conclusions Shoulder outcome measures reflected different psychologic aspects of illness behavior, and the contributions made by psychologic distress to different shoulder outcome instruments apparently differed. Physicians should select and interpret the findings of shoulder outcome instruments properly by considering their psychologic implications.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

To What Degree do Shoulder Outcome Instruments Reflect Patients’ Psychologic Distress?

Roh

Noh

et al. 2012

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Simple Shoulder Test contains 12 yes/no questions that assess a patient's shoulder pain, function, and ability to perform activities of daily living. It is scored on a scale of 0 to 12 with higher scores correlating with decreased pain and increased function [13]. The minimal clinically important difference on the Simple Shoulder Test for patients with rotator cuff disease is 2 points [29].…”

Section: Description Of Followup Routinementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, the degree to which the presence of psychological distress might be associated with differences in outcome scores and whether the prevalence of psychological distress in this patient population decreases after recovery from a procedure that seeks to decrease pain are, to our knowledge, unknown. Patients who undergo shoulder arthroscopy for the treatment of full-thickness rotator cuff tears commonly are assessed preoperatively with general and shoulderspecific measures of pain and function, including the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, the Simple Shoulder Test [13], and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score [20]. Minimal clinically important differences, defined as a difference reflecting a change in a patient's condition large enough for that patient to perceive, for the VAS [30], Simple Shoulder Test [29], and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score [29] have been reported.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

One-year Patient-reported Outcomes After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Do Not Correlate With Mild to Moderate Psychological Distress

Potter

Wylie

Greis

et al. 2015

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Patients with shoulder and rotator cuff pathology who exhibit greater levels of psychological distress report inferior preoperative self-assessments of pain and function. In several other areas of orthopaedics, higher levels of distress correlate with a higher likelihood of persistent pain and disability after recovery from surgery. To our knowledge, the relationship between psychological distress and outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair has not been similarly investigated. Questions/purposes (1) Are higher levels of preoperative psychological distress associated with differences in outcome scores (visual analog scale [VAS] for pain, Simple Shoulder Test, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score) 1 year after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair? (2) Are higher levels of preoperative psychological distress associated with less improvement in outcome scores (VAS for pain, Simple Shoulder Test, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score) 1 year after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair? (3) Does the prevalence of psychological distress in a population with full-thickness rotator cuff tears change when assessed preoperatively and 1 year after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair? Methods Eighty-five patients with full-thickness rotator cuff tears were prospectively enrolled; 70 patients (82%) were assessed at 1-year followup. During the study period, the three participating surgeons performed 269 rotator cuff repairs; in large part, the low overall rate of enrollment was related to two surgeons enrolling only two patients total in the initial 14 months of the study. Psychological distress was quantified using the Distress Risk Assessment Method questionnaire, and patients completed self-assessments including the VAS for pain, the Simple Shoulder Test, and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score preoperatively and 1 year after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Fifty of 85 patients (59%) had normal levels of distress, 26 of 85 (31%) had moderate levels of distress, and nine of 85 (11%) had severe levels of distress. Statistical models were used to assess the effect of psychological distress on patient self-assessment of shoulder pain and function at 1 year after surgery. Results With the numbers available, distressed patients were not different from nondistressed patients in terms of One of the authors certifies that he (PEG), or a member of his immediate family, has or may receive payments or benefits, during the study period, an amount of less than USD 10,000 of research support funding from DePuy Mitek (Raynham, MA, USA). One of the authors certifies that he (RTB), or a member of his immediate family, has or may receive payments or benefits, during the study period, an amount of USD 10,000 to USD 100,000 of research support funding from DePuy Mitek. One of the authors certifies that he (RZT), or a member of his immediate family, has or may receive payments or benefits, during the study period, an amount of USD 100,000 to USD 1,000,000 of research support funding from the Depart...

show abstract

“…Moreover, the "arm, shoulder, and hand" questionnaire has been used in some studies conducted on the patients with thoracic outlet syndrome [20][21][22]. In Table 1, the characteristics of the resources and in Table 2, two characteristics on evaluating the treatment outcomes [23][24][25][26] are presented.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The second part is evaluated by the evaluator and includes 5 items for measuring the motion range, 11 items for examining the symptoms, 5 items for evaluating the power, and 8 items and 1 open item for evaluating instability. [24]. These instruments are recommended for patients with thoracic outlet syndrome, however none of them has been validated and reliable in these patients and using them requires more research on their psychometric properties in these patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review Study: Clinical Assessment of Patients With Thoracic Outlet Syndrome

Ghamari¹,

Hosseini²,

Layeghi³

et al. 2016

PTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Thoracic outlet syndrome is one of the most controversial topics in clinical medicine due to its difficult assessment and management. The appropriate treatment depends on accurate and comprehensive assessment. This study aimed to review the current assessments of these patients. Methods:This study was conducted by review of the articles published between 1990 and 2014. Search was conducted by keywords such as assessment, evaluation, outcome measure, tool, thoracic outlet syndrome, non-surgical treatments, conservative, and rehabilitation. In this regard, internal and external databases, including PubMed, OVID, ProQuest, Web of science, Elsevier, OT seeker, SID, Magiran, Iran Medex, Medlib, and Google scholar were used. Results:The results showed that the most common assessments for these patients in a clinical and research setting included a thorough review of history and subjective evaluation. No specific tools were found for patients with thoracic outlet syndrome but 5 generic outcome measures were suggested to measure the outcome of interventions in these patients. Conclusion:At present, comprehensive evaluation of patients with thoracic outlet syndrome needs different assessments and using the generic questionnaire that is designed for people with orthopedic conditions. Therefore, a comprehensive assessment tool with a holistic view and specific for patients with thoracic outlet syndrome is necessary.

show abstract

Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the simple shoulder test: Psychometric properties by age and injury type

Cited by 209 publications

References 19 publications

To What Degree do Shoulder Outcome Instruments Reflect Patients’ Psychologic Distress?

To What Degree do Shoulder Outcome Instruments Reflect Patients’ Psychologic Distress?

One-year Patient-reported Outcomes After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Do Not Correlate With Mild to Moderate Psychological Distress

A Review Study: Clinical Assessment of Patients With Thoracic Outlet Syndrome

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About