Derek F P van Deurzen1, Frans L Garssen2, Ronald N Wessel3, Gino M M J Kerkhoffs4, Michel P J van den Bekerom2, Marieke F van Wier2. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Shoulder and Elbow Expertise Center, Joint Research, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: d.vandeurzen@olvg.nl. 2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Shoulder and Elbow Expertise Center, Joint Research, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, St Antonius ziekenhuis, Utrecht, the Netherlands. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Academic Center of Evidence Based Sports Medicine (ACES), Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Collaboration for Health and Safety in Sports (ACHSS), Amsterdam, the Netherlands; International Olympic Committee (IOC) Research Centre of Excellence, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Popeye sign is a frequently reported finding following long head of the biceps (LHB) surgery and may be more often detected by doctors than by patients. This study investigates agreement between patients and doctors regarding the presence of a Popeye sign following LHB surgery. METHOD: This interobserver study investigates agreement between patients and consulting physicians with regard to assessment of a Popeye sign in patients following LHB surgery. Furthermore, this was compared with assessments by non-consulting physicians (observers) using digital photographs of the operated arm, taken both preoperatively and postoperatively. Data about gender, age, and body mass index (BMI) were collected to investigate their role in doctor's reporting of a Popeye sign. Patient's dissatisfaction with a Popeye sign in the operated arm was evaluated as well. RESULTS: Ninety-seven patients (mean age 61 ± 6.0 years, 62% male) underwent LHB surgery. A Popeye sign was reported by 2 patients (2%) as opposed to 32 cases (40%) by consulting physicians, of which only 1 case was in agreement. Krippendorff's alpha (Kalpha) for agreement between observers for preoperative photographs was 0.074 (95% CI -0.277, 0.382) and 0.495 (95% CI 0.317, 0.659) for postoperative cases. Kalpha between observers and consulting physicians for pre- and postoperative cases were 0.033 (95% CI -970, 0.642) and 0.499 (95% CI 0.265, 0.699), respectively. Phi coefficient analysis showed a moderate, statistically significant correlation between male sex and Popeye sign identification. Rank-biserial calculation revealed negligible correlation between BMI and age with regard to detecting a Popeye sign by both consulting physicians and observers. Dissatisfaction about swelling in the upper arm was reported in 1 case, though in a location that did not correspond to the location of a Popeye sign. CONCLUSION: The Popeye sign is more often identified by doctors than by patients after undergoing LHB surgery. BMI and age are not related to the detection of a Popeye sign, but sex is moderately correlated. Together with the low percentage of dissatisfaction of patients with this swelling, this signifies that a Popeye sign seems to be a doctor's rather than a patient's problem.
BACKGROUND: The Popeye sign is a frequently reported finding following long head of the biceps (LHB) surgery and may be more often detected by doctors than by patients. This study investigates agreement between patients and doctors regarding the presence of a Popeye sign following LHB surgery. METHOD: This interobserver study investigates agreement between patients and consulting physicians with regard to assessment of a Popeye sign in patients following LHB surgery. Furthermore, this was compared with assessments by non-consulting physicians (observers) using digital photographs of the operated arm, taken both preoperatively and postoperatively. Data about gender, age, and body mass index (BMI) were collected to investigate their role in doctor's reporting of a Popeye sign. Patient's dissatisfaction with a Popeye sign in the operated arm was evaluated as well. RESULTS: Ninety-seven patients (mean age 61 ± 6.0 years, 62% male) underwent LHB surgery. A Popeye sign was reported by 2 patients (2%) as opposed to 32 cases (40%) by consulting physicians, of which only 1 case was in agreement. Krippendorff's alpha (Kalpha) for agreement between observers for preoperative photographs was 0.074 (95% CI -0.277, 0.382) and 0.495 (95% CI 0.317, 0.659) for postoperative cases. Kalpha between observers and consulting physicians for pre- and postoperative cases were 0.033 (95% CI -970, 0.642) and 0.499 (95% CI 0.265, 0.699), respectively. Phi coefficient analysis showed a moderate, statistically significant correlation between male sex and Popeye sign identification. Rank-biserial calculation revealed negligible correlation between BMI and age with regard to detecting a Popeye sign by both consulting physicians and observers. Dissatisfaction about swelling in the upper arm was reported in 1 case, though in a location that did not correspond to the location of a Popeye sign. CONCLUSION: The Popeye sign is more often identified by doctors than by patients after undergoing LHB surgery. BMI and age are not related to the detection of a Popeye sign, but sex is moderately correlated. Together with the low percentage of dissatisfaction of patients with this swelling, this signifies that a Popeye sign seems to be a doctor's rather than a patient's problem.
Authors: Bauke Kooistra; Navin Gurnani; Alexander Weening; Derek van Deurzen; Michel van den Bekerom Journal: Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil Date: 2021-07-03
Authors: Riccardo Ranieri; Marko Nabergoj; Li Xu; Pierre Le Coz; Ahmad Farihan Mohd Don; Alexandre Lädermann; Philippe Collin Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-09-26 Impact factor: 4.964