Keith T Palmer1. 1. MRC Epidemiology Resource Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK. ktp@mrc.soton.ac.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate approaches adopted to diagnose soft tissue rheumatic disorders of the upper limb (ULDs) in vibration-exposed populations and in other settings, and to compare their methodological qualities. METHODS: Systematic searches were made of the Medline, Embase, and CINAHL electronic bibliographic databases, and of various supplementary sources (textbooks, reviews, conference and workshop proceedings, personal files). For vibration-exposed populations, qualifying papers were scored in terms of the provenance of their measuring instruments (adequacy of documentation, standardisation, reliability, criterion-related and content validity). Similar criteria were applied to general proposals for whole diagnostic schemes, and evidence was collated on the test-retest reliability of symptom histories and clinical signs. RESULTS: In total, 23 relevant reports were identified concerning vibration-exposed populations--21 involving symptoms and 9 involving examination/diagnosis. Most of the instruments employed scored poorly in terms of methodological quality. The search also identified, from the wider literature, more than a dozen schemes directed at classifying ULDs, and 18 studies of test-retest reliability of symptoms and physical signs in the upper limb. Findings support the use of the standardised Nordic questionnaire for symptom inquiry and suggest that a range of physical signs can be elicited with reasonable between-observer agreement. Four classification schemes rated well in terms of content validity. One of these had excellent documentation, and one had been tested for repeatability, agreement with an external reference standard, and utility in distinguishing groups that differed in disability, prognosis and associated risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Hitherto, most studies of ULDs in vibration-exposed populations have used custom-specified diagnostic methods, poorly documented, and non-stringent in terms of standardisation and supporting evidence of reliability and/or validity. The broader literature contains several question sets and procedures that improve upon this, and offer scope in vibration-exposed populations to diagnose ULDs more systematically.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate approaches adopted to diagnose soft tissue rheumatic disorders of the upper limb (ULDs) in vibration-exposed populations and in other settings, and to compare their methodological qualities. METHODS: Systematic searches were made of the Medline, Embase, and CINAHL electronic bibliographic databases, and of various supplementary sources (textbooks, reviews, conference and workshop proceedings, personal files). For vibration-exposed populations, qualifying papers were scored in terms of the provenance of their measuring instruments (adequacy of documentation, standardisation, reliability, criterion-related and content validity). Similar criteria were applied to general proposals for whole diagnostic schemes, and evidence was collated on the test-retest reliability of symptom histories and clinical signs. RESULTS: In total, 23 relevant reports were identified concerning vibration-exposed populations--21 involving symptoms and 9 involving examination/diagnosis. Most of the instruments employed scored poorly in terms of methodological quality. The search also identified, from the wider literature, more than a dozen schemes directed at classifying ULDs, and 18 studies of test-retest reliability of symptoms and physical signs in the upper limb. Findings support the use of the standardised Nordic questionnaire for symptom inquiry and suggest that a range of physical signs can be elicited with reasonable between-observer agreement. Four classification schemes rated well in terms of content validity. One of these had excellent documentation, and one had been tested for repeatability, agreement with an external reference standard, and utility in distinguishing groups that differed in disability, prognosis and associated risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Hitherto, most studies of ULDs in vibration-exposed populations have used custom-specified diagnostic methods, poorly documented, and non-stringent in terms of standardisation and supporting evidence of reliability and/or validity. The broader literature contains several question sets and procedures that improve upon this, and offer scope in vibration-exposed populations to diagnose ULDs more systematically.
Authors: J L Hoving; R Buchbinder; S Green; A Forbes; N Bellamy; C Brand; R Buchanan; S Hall; M Patrick; P Ryan; A Stockman Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 19.103