4.5 Article

Validation of Grayscale-Based Quantitative Ultrasound in Manual Wheelchair Users Relationship to Established Clinical Measures of Shoulder Pathology

Journal

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e3181d8a238

Keywords

Ultrasound; Grayscale; Tendinopathy; Shoulder

Funding

  1. Office of Research and Development, Rehabilitation Research and Development Service, Department of Veterans Affairs [B3142C]
  2. National Institute of Health [R21HD054529]
  3. National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) [H133E070024]
  4. NSF

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The primary aim of this study is to establish the validity of grayscale-based quantitative ultrasound (QUS) measures of the biceps and supraspinatus tendons. Design: Nine QUS measures of the biceps and supraspinatus tendons were computed from ultrasound images collected from 67 manual wheelchair users. Shoulder pathology was measured using questionnaires, physical examination maneuvers, and a clinical ultrasound grading scale. Results: Increased age, duration of wheelchair use, and body mass correlated with a darker and more homogenous tendon appearance. Subjects with pain during physical examination tests for biceps tenderness and acromioclavicular joint tenderness exhibited significantly different supraspinatus QUS values. Even when controlling for tendon depth, QUS measures of the biceps tendon differed significantly between subjects with healthy tendons, mild tendinosis, and severe tendinosis. Clinical grading of supraspinatus tendon health was correlated with QUS measures of the supraspinatus tendon. Conclusions: QUS is valid method to quantify tendinopathy and may allow for early detection of tendinosis. Manual wheelchair users are at a high risk for developing shoulder tendon pathology and may benefit from QUS-based research that focuses on identifying interventions designed to reduce this risk.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available