Primary Image

- Rehabilitation Measures Database
- American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form
share
- LinkedIn Logo linkedin
Last Updated
Purpose
The ASES is a condition-specific scale that is intended to measure functional limitations and pain of the shoulder.
Link to Instrument
Acronym ASES
Area of Assessment
Activities of Daily Living
Functional Mobility
Pain
Upper Extremity Function
Assessment Type
Patient Reported Outcomes
Administration Mode
Paper & Pencil
Cost
Free
Diagnosis/Conditions
- Arthritis + Joint Conditions
- Pain Management
- Sports & Musculoskeletal Injuries
Populations
Mixed Populations
Joint Pain and Fractures
Key Descriptions
- The ASES is a 100-point scale that consists of two dimensions: pain and activities of daily living. There is one pain scale worth 50 points and ten activities of daily living worth 50 points. Patients can complete the questionnaire in less than five minutes (Leggin, 2006).
- The patient self-assessment (pASES) includes 6 pain items and 10 functional items that are shoulder specific (Angst, 2008).
- The pASES form has 3 sections: pain, instability, ADLs (Goldhahn, 2008).
1) Pain section: 4 questions with yes/no responses, 1 question covering number of pain tablets per day, and a VAS scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain).
2) Instability section: 2 questions (1. Response yes/no about feelings of instability, 2. Quantify instability from 0 (stable) to 10 (very unstable).
3) ADLs: Each shoulder is included (affected/non affected), 10 items, with a 4 point ordinal scale, range: 0 (unable to perform activity) to 3 (no difficulty in doing activity) (Goldhahn 2008). - ASES-s contains 2 parts: patient self evaluation and physician assessment.Self evaluation: visual analog scales for assessment of pain/instability, ADL: utilizes 4 point scale, 3 min to fill out (Dowrick, 2004).
- Modified ASES eliminates “sleep on painful side” and “throw ball overhead”, and adds “open a jar of food”, “cut with a knife”, “use a phone”, “do up buttons”, and “carry shopping bag” (Beaton, 1998).
- Originally made as: “baseline measure of shoulder function, applicable to all patients regardless of diagnosis.” Was designed with aspiration to be utilized widely (Goldhahn, 2008).
- When it was created (ASES-s) it was supposed to be a “state-of-the-art questionnaire” with three main components: 1) Ease of use, 2) Method of assessing ADLs, and 3) Inclusion of a patient self-evaluation section (Goldhahn, 2008).
Equipment Required
- Patient Report Form
- Writing Utensil
Time to Administer
5minutes
Required Training
No Training
Age Ranges
Adult
18 - 64
years
Elderly Adult
65 +
years
Instrument Reviewers
Initially reviewed by Katie Sly SPT, LAT-ATC; Kelly Walsh SPT; Ellese Nickles, SPT; Andrew Foster, SPT; Alexis Williams, SPT, LAT-ATC; Mary Anne Rutz, SPT; Christopher Ritter, SPT; Karl Lutschewitz, SPT; Jonathan Outlaw, SPT, NCMBT, LMBT; Holli McClendon, SPT.
Body Part
Upper Extremity
ICF Domain
Body Function
Activity
Participation
Measurement Domain
Motor
Activities of Daily Living
Sensory
Professional Association Recommendation
Reliability by Surgical Status of Self-Reported Outcomes in Patients Who Have Shoulder Pathologies:(Cook, 2002)
Recommendations: for use based on acuity level of the patient, based on level of care in which the assessment is taken, based on SCI AIS Classification, based on EDSS Classification, for entry-level physical therapy education and use in research
Considerations
Shoulder Dysfuntion:(Cook, 2002)
Lack of a gold standard for comparing estimates of shoulder outcome variables.
Self-reported function, disability, and satisfaction may be compared across measure and across time, but there is no external referent by which the scales’ external validity can be established.
The small sample size also limited the current study.
A larger pool of participants would have narrowed the confidence intervals around the calculated ICC values and may have broadened the conclusions that could be drawn from the results.
No control over when patients actually completed the second questionnaire.
After completing the first questionnaire, participants were given a blank second copy and asked to return this copy 1 week later. It is possible that some patients completed the second questionnaire after less than the requested amount of time had elapsed.
Shoulder instability, Rotator cuff disease, Glenohumeral arthritis:(Kocher, 2005) Study limitations include the use of a large, prospectively maintained computerized database, heterogeneity among the patients, and variation in the specific surgical techniques used. All psychometric properties of the ASES were acceptable, however the reliability may not be precise enough to use on an individual basis. Other shoulder-specific instruments need psychometric testing to compare to the ASES and aid in the formal development of a widely accepted shoulder-specific outcome measure.
Patients without shoulder problems:(Sallay, 2003) Study limitations include the use of patients from an outpatient subspecialty practice in the Midwest because it may not be representative of a larger population. The ASES was found to be highly reliable, but age and demographics including attitude, activity level, and general well-being of the patients should be taken into consideration when evaluating posttreatment scores because these things may be related to shoulder function.
Shoulder Arthroplasty:(Goldhahn, 2008) ASES shoulder form did not disclose any key differences in cross-cultural adaptation process from English to German.Total score of German ASES demonstrated good reliability/validity that could be utilized following a joint replacement. The instability portion of the measure does not give useful clinical information.
Patients without shoulder problems: (Sallay, 2003) Study limitations include the use of patients from an outpatient subspecialty practice in the Midwest because it may not be representative of a larger population. The ASES was found to be highly reliable, but age and demographics including attitude, activity level, and general well-being of the patients should be taken into consideration when evaluating posttreatment scores because these things may be related to shoulder function.
Shoulder Arthroplasty:(Goldhahn, 2008) ASES shoulder form did not disclose any key differences in cross-cultural adaptation process from English to German.Total score of German ASES demonstrated good reliability/validity that could be utilized following a joint replacement. The instability portion of the measure does not give useful clinical information.
Do you see an error or have a suggestion for this instrument summary? Pleasee-mail us!
Mixed Populations
back to PopulationsStandard Error of Measurement (SEM)
Shoulder Dysfunction: (Michener, 2002)
- Pain:SEM=5.1 +/- 8.4
- Function:SEM= 4.1 +/- 6.7
- Total:SEM= 6.7 +/- 11.0
Minimal Detectable Change (MDC)
Shoulder Dysfunction: (Michener, 2002)
- Pain:MDC=7.2
- Function:MDC=5.8
- Total:MDC= 9.4
Total Shoulder Arthroplasty:(Angst, 2008)
- Total:MDC= 10.5 (90% CI)
Shoulder Trauma:(Slobogean, 2011)
- MDC= 16 (90% CI)
Minimally Clinically Important Difference (MCID)
Shoulder Dysfunction: (Michener, 2002)
- MCID= 6.4 points
Shoulder Trauma: (Slobogean, 2011)
- MCID=6.4 points
Test/Retest Reliability
Shoulder Dysfunction: (Michener, 2002)
- Excellent:ICC= 0.84
Shoulder Arthroplasty:(Angst, 2008)
- Pain:Excellent(ICC=0.84)
- Function:Excellent(ICC=0.92)
- Total:Excellent(ICC=0.93).
- Instability:Adequate(ICC=0.54).
Shoulder Arthroplasty:(Goldhahn, 2008)
pASES
“Does your shoulder feel unstable?”:Poor(ICC=0.37)
“Lift 5 kg above shoulder”:Excellent(ICC=0.88),
21/28 items:AdequatetoExcellentICC>0.70
Instability (2 questions) were least reliable:
Item 07:Poor(ICC=0.37)
Item 08:AdequateICC=0.54.
Shoulder pain:(Beaton, 1998)
ICC:Excellent= 0.96
Shoulder dysfunction[instability, dislocation, humeral fracture]:
(Dowrick, 2004)
- Pain:Excellent(ICC=0.79)
- Function:Excellent(ICC=0.82)
- Total:Excellent(ICC=0.84)
Shoulder instability, Rotator cuff disease, Glenohumeral arthritis:(Kocher, 2005)
- Total:Excellent(ICC = 0.94)
- Pain:Excellent(ICC = 0.83)
- ExcellentICC (≥0.75) for all domains of function except sleep on affected side (ICC = 0.71).
Patients without shoulder problems:(Sallay, 2003)
- ICC:Excellent= 0.96
Internal Consistency
Shoulder Dysfunction: (Michener, 2002)
Excellent: (Chronbach alpha= 0.86)
Shoulder dysfunction[instability,dislocation, humeral fracture]:(Dowrick, 2004)
Excellent: (Cronbach's Alpha= 0.86)
Shoulder Trauma: (Slobogean, 2011):
AdequatetoExcellent:(Chronbach's Alpha= 0.61-0.86)
Rotator Cuff, SLAP, and Instability Surgeries: (Oh, 2009)
- ADL:Excellent(Cronbach's Alpha = 0.850)
- Strength:Excellent(Cronbach's Alpha = 0.830)
- Instability:Excellent(Cronbach's Alpha = 0.970)
- Pain:Adequate(Cronbach's Alpha = 0.711)
- ROM:Adequate(Cronbach's Alpha = 0.770)
- Signs:Adequate(Cronbach'sAlpha = 0.700)
Shoulder instability, Rotator cuff disease, Glenohumeral arthritis:(Kocher, 2005)
- Patients w/shoulder instability:Poor(Cronbach's Alpha = 0.61)
- Patients w/ rotator cuff disease:Poor(Cronbach alpha = 0.64)
- Patients w/ glenohumeral arthritis:Poor(Cronbach alpha = 0.62).
Shoulder Arthroplasty:(Goldhahn, 2008)
- Pain:Excellent(Cronbach's Alpha= 0.91)
- Instability:Adequate(Cronbach's Alpha= 0.70)
- Function:Excellent(Cronbach's Alpha= 0.96)
- Function (control side):Excellent(Cronbach's Alpha= 0.93)
- Total ASES:Excellent(Cronbach's Alpha= 0.96)
Criterion Validity (Predictive/Concurrent)
Rotator Cuff, SLAP, and Instability Surgeries: (Oh, 2009)
- SF-36 Physical Function:Poor(Pearson r = 0.266)
- SF-36 Role Physics:Poor(Pearson r = 0.208)
- SF-36 Bodily Pain:Poor(Pearson r = 0.048)
- SF-36 General Health:Poor(Pearson r = 0.026)
- SF-36 Vitality:Poor(Pearson r = 0.102)
- SF-36 Social Function:Poor(Pearson r = 0.179)
- SF-36 Role Emotion:Poor(Pearson r = 0.106)
- SF-36 Mental Health:Poor(Pearson r = 0.053)
- SF-36 Physical Component Score:Poor(Pearson r = 0.199)
- SF-36 Mental Component Score:Poor(Pearson r = 0.058)
Shoulder Arthroplasty:(Goldhahn, 2008)
- pASES demonstratedAdequatetoExcellentcorrelations (r=0.57-0.66) with many scales of SF-36.
- Joint Specific Questionnaire SPADI (shoulder) had highest correlationExcellent:(r= 0.92).
- Strong correlation between pASES and joint specific measures. Weakest correlations: between SPADI and pASES.
Shoulder instability, Rotator cuff disease, Glenohumeral arthritis:(Kocher, 2005)
Significant correlations (p < 0.05) between the ASES shoulder scale and the physical functioningAdequate: (r= 0.57),
role-physicalPoor:(r= 0.32), and bodily painAdequate:(r= 0.58) domains of the SF-12 scale.
Construct Validity
Shoulder Dysfunction: (Michener, 2002)The correlations (95% CI) for the assessment of convergent validity were significant between the patient self-report sections of the ASES and the Penn Score (r=0.78; P<.01; CI, 0.86-0.66), SF-36 physical function score (r-0.41; P=0.001; CI, 0.18-0.69(, SF-36 role physical score (r=0.33; P=0.008; CI, 0.09-0.53), and SF-36 physical component summary score (r=0.40; P=0.001; CI, 0.17-0.59). The correlations for the assessment of divergent validity were not significant between the ASES and the SF-36 role emotional score (r=0.24; P=.21; CI, 0.01-0.46), SF-36 mental health score (r=0.05; P=.70; CI, 0.20 to 0.29), or SF-36 mental component summary score (r=0.15; P+.25: CI 0.10-0.38)
Rotator Cuff, SLAP, and Instability Surgeries: (Oh, 2009)
Adequatecorrelation of ASES with (SST) Simple Shoulder Test (Pearson r = 0.350) and (Constant) Constant score (Pearson r = 0.356) and (UCLA) University of California, Los Angeles shoulder score (Pearson r = 0.373). Poor correlation of ASES with (WOSI) Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (Pearson r = 0.144)and Rowe (Pearson r = -.146).
Shoulder Arthroplasty:(Angst, 2008) Excellent correlation between the ASES and SPADI (r=0.79), excellent correlation between the ASESand DASH (r=0.63), adequate correlation between the pASES and SF-36 PCS (r=0.41), poor correlation between the ASES and SF-36 MCS (r=0.05).
Variety of Shoulder Disorders: (Leggin, 2006) Excellent correlation between the ASES and Penn Shoulder Score (r=0.87).
Full Spectrum RC pathology: (Kirkley, 2003) Construct validation demonstrated that this instrument correlated predictably with other measurement tools (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand outcome measure; University of California Los Angeles Shoulder Rating Scale; Constant Score; Rowe; Sickness Impact Profile; Short Form 36; and range of motion); 21 of 21 correlations within 0.19.
Face Validity
Shoulder Dysfunction: (Michener, 2002)
- The patient self-report section of the ASES evaluates aspects of activities of daily living as well as work and recreational activities, which provides evidence for the face validity of this scale. However, no further data is provided.
Floor/Ceiling Effects
Shoulder Arthroplasty:(Goldhahn, 2008)
Average scores (65/81 out of 100), upper ⅓ scale.
- “Do you take narcotic pain medication?”:Poor(92% did not take pain medication)
- “Does your shoulder feel unstable?”:Poor(86% put stable)
- “Manage Toileting”:Poor88%,“Comb hair”:Poor77%.
- pASES: Did not show floor/low ceiling effects.
- Researchers had expectations of an increased floor effect Items 07/08, the results did not meet their expectations (item 07: floor effect 86%, item 08: 45%).
Shoulder instability, Rotator cuff disease, Glenohumeral arthritis:(Kocher, 2005)
AdequatetoExcellent:(<15%) floor and ceiling effects
Ceiling effect for shoulder instability = 1.3%, all other floor and ceiling effects = 0%).
Responsiveness
Shoulder Dysfunction: (Michener, 2002)
- Large (ES= 1.4)
- Large (SRM=1.54)
Rotator Cuff, SLAP, and Instability Surgeries:(Oh, 2009)
- Large:(ES = 0.617, SRM = 0.771).
Shoulder dysfunction[instability,dislocation, humeral fracture]:(Dowrick, 2004)
- Pain:Large(SRM=1.08)
- Function:Large(SRM= 1.34)
- Total Score:Large(SRM=1.54)
Shoulder Trauma: (Slobogean, 2011)
- Largeeffect size of 1.3 and average standard response mean of 1.1
Shoulder Arthroplasty:(Angst, 2008)
- pASES Pain:Large(SRM=1.35)
- Function:Large(SRM=1.73)
- Total:Large(SRM=1.81).
- pASES Instability:Moderate(SRM=0.29)
Osteoarthritis:(Angst, 2011)
- Total or hemi shoulder arthroplasy:Large(ES=3.53).
Rheumatoid, osteoarthritis: total shoulder arthroplasty:(Angst, 2011)
- Large(ES= 2.13, SRM 1.81).
Calcific tendinitis: (Angst, 2011)
- Subacromial steroid:Large(ES= 1.65-1.84)
Various, mainly impingement:(Angst, 2011)
- Large(ES= 1.39, SRM= 1.54)
Rotator cuff disease: (Angst, 2011)
- Large (SRM= 1.42)
Rotator cuff, instability, arthritis, surgery:(Angst, 2011)
Large(ES= 0.93-1.16).
Shoulder instability, Rotator cuff disease, Glenohumeral arthritis:(Kocher, 2005)
- Shoulder Instability:Large(ES= 0.86, SRM= 0.93)
- Rotator Cuff Disease:Large(ES= 1.33, SRM= 1.16)
- Glenohumeral Arthritis:Large(ES= 1.74, SRM= 1.11).
Bibliography
Angst, F. et. al. (2008). Responsiveness of six outcome assessment instruments in total shoulder arthroplasty.Arthritis & Rheumatism: Arthritis Care & Research,59(3), 391-398.
Angst, F. et. al. (2011) Measures of Adult Shoulder Function.Arthritis Care & Research.American College of Rheumatology.63(S11), S174-188
Beaton, D. (1998). Assessing the reliability and responsiveness of 5 shoulder questionnaires. Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery, 7(6), 565-572.
Bot, S. (2004). Clinimetric evaluation of shoulder disability questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature. Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 63(4), 335-341.
Cook, K. (2002). Reliability by surgical status of self-reported outcomes in patients who have shoulder pathologies. The journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy, 32(7), 336-346.doi:10.2519/jospt.2002.32.7.336
Dowrick, A. (2005) Outcome instruments for the assessment of the upper extremity following trauma: a review. International Journal of the Care of the Injured.(4):468-76.
Ge, Y. et al. (2013). “The Development and Evaluation of a New Shoulder Scoring System Based on the View of Patients and Physicians:The Fudan University Shoulder Score.” Journal of Anthroscopy and Related Surgery. 29(4): 613-622.
Goldhahn, J. et al. (2008). Lessons learned during the cross-cultural adaptation of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder form into German. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. Mar-Apr; 17 (2): 248-254.doi:10.1016/j.jse.2007.06.027. Epub 2008 Jan 22
Kirkley A, et. al (2003) “The development and evaluation of a disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaire for disorders of the rotator cuff: The Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index.” Clin J Sport Med. (2):84-92. PubMed PMID: 12629425.
Kocher M. S. et. al. (2005) Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Subjective Shoulder Scale in patients with shoulder instability, rotator cuff disease, and glenohumeral arthritis. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. (87-A):2006-2011. doi:10.2106/JBJS.C.01624
Leggin, B. et al. (2006). The Penn Shoulder Score: reliability and validity.Journal Of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy,36(3), 138-151.
Michener, L. et al. (2011) American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized ShoulderAssessment Form, patient self-report section: reliability, validity, and responsiveness.Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery. 11:587-594.
Oh J. H. et al. (2009). “Comparative Evaluation of the Measurement Properties of Various Shoulder Outcome Instruments.” The American Journal of Sports Medicine 37(6): 1161-1167.
Richards R. R. et. al (1994)A standardized method for the assessment of shoulder function.J Shoulder Elbow Surg. (6):347-52. doi: 10.1016/S1058-2746(09)80019-0. Epub 2009 Feb 13. PubMed PMID: 22958838.
Sallay P. et. al. (2003) The measurement of normative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores. J. Shoulder Elbow Surg. 12(6):622-627. doi:10.1016/S1058-2746(03)00209-X.
Saboe, L. A. et. al. (1997). "Early predictors of functional independence 2 years after spinal cord injury." Arch Phys Med Rehabil 78(6): 644-650.
Shoulder Trauma (Slobogean, 2011): Slobogean G.P., Slobogean B.L. Measuring Shoulder Injury Function: Common Scales and Checklists. Injury, Int. J. Care Injured 42 (2011) 248-252
More Instruments Like This
We have reviewed nearly 300 instruments for use with a number of diagnoses including stroke, spinal cord injury and traumatic brain injury among several others.
updated Sep 12, 2022
Functional Status Score fo...
read more
updated Aug 5, 2021
Functional Mobility Assess...
read more
updated Aug 1, 2021
2 Minute Step Test
read more
FAQs
How do you score the ases shoulder form? ›
Calculation of the ASES score is itself a complicated process. The total score is weighted 50% for pain and 50% for function. The pain score is calculated by subtracting the VAS from 10 and multiplying it by 5. The 10 functional questions are scored on a 4-point scale (0-3) with a maximum functional score of 30.
What is the American shoulder and Elbow Surgeons questionnaire? ›Key Descriptions. The ASES is a 100-point scale that consists of two dimensions: pain and activities of daily living. There is one pain scale worth 50 points and ten activities of daily living worth 50 points. Patients can complete the questionnaire in less than five minutes (Leggin, 2006).
What is the American shoulder and elbow surgeons standardized shoulder form? ›The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) is a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM); it is widely used in sports medicine to evaluate shoulder function, and applied both in clinical research and clinical practice [3-8].
What does ases shoulder score mean? ›Scores range from 0 to 100 with a score of 0 indicating a worse shoulder condition and 100 indicating a better shoulder condition. Original Literature: Richards, Robin R., et al. “A standardized method for the assessment of shoulder function.” Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 3.6 (1994): 347-352.
How do you score a simple shoulder test? ›Overall score is calculated by: number of “yes”/number of completed items 100 = % of “yes” response. 0 = worst and 100 = best function. It is self-reported outcome measure. The items on the scale measure the ability of the affected shoulder to perform work duties, dressing, bathing, lifting, carrying and throwing.
Which is the best outcome measure for rotator cuff tears? ›We recommend that the SPADI be the shoulder-specific instrument used to assess outcomes in patients with rotator cuff tears. This can help standardize measurement of patient-reported outcomes in patients with rotator cuff disorders.
What is shoulder disability questionnaire? ›The Shoulder Disability Questionnaire (SDQ) is a measure covering 16 items designed to evaluate functional status limitation in patients with shoulder disorders. The responsiveness of the SDQ was evaluated for 180 patients with soft tissue shoulder disorders, without underlying systemic disorders.
What does the shoulder test measure? ›The Apley scratch test is a shoulder flexibility test used to evaluate the flexibility and mobility of your shoulder joint. The test can also be used to assess the range of motion (ROM) of your shoulder, including flexion and extension.
What is a constant score? ›Its score ranges from 0 to 100 points, representing worst and best shoulder function, respectively. In the original publication, the pain experienced during normal activities of daily living was scored as: no pain = 15 points, mild = 10, moderate = 5 and severe = 0 points [1].
What is a good sane score? ›Patients were included if they were 18 years or older and were excluded if they had incomplete SANE or rFFI data. Results of the two scores were compared using the Pearson or Spearman correlation coefficients, with correlation defined as excellent (>0.7), excellent-good (0.61-0.7), good (0.4-0.6), or poor (0.2-0.39).
Which shoulder test is 75% accurate? ›
The accuracy of the tests was the greatest when muscle weakness was interpreted as indicating a torn supraspinatus tendon in both the full can test (75% accurate) and the empty can test (70% accurate).
Is shoulder replacement the same as rotator cuff? ›Shoulder replacement removes part or all of the shoulder joint to replace it with artificial implants, whereas rotator cuff surgery repairs tears or injuries. If the rotator cuff is damaged beyond repair, shoulder replacement surgery is not an option because the cuff is required to help hold the new joint in place.
Who is a good candidate for shoulder replacement? ›- Torn rotator cuff.
- Osteoarthritis.
- Serious shoulder injury or fractures.
- Persistent pain that interferes with everyday activities.
- Moderate to severe pain while resting.
- Loss of motion and/or weakness.
- Avascular necrosis.
- Rheumatoid arthritis.
Three physical tests used to identify a rotator cuff injury include the drop arm test, empty can test, and Neer test. A more invasive test is known as the pain-relief test. In this, an orthopedic specialist injects lidocaine into the shoulder joint. If the shot relieves the pain, it is likely the rotator cuff.
Which 2 special tests are used to evaluate for instability in the shoulder? ›The sulcus test. Caudal traction is applied to the humerus in an attempt to displace the humerus inferiorly. If this test is positive, multidirectional instability is present. The anterior apprehension test, or crank test, is also used to evaluate shoulder instability.
Can you get disability for rotator cuff surgery? ›Some people may be able to qualify for disability benefits after a serious rotator cuff tear, but the specifics depend on each person's medical records. In order to receive Social Security Disability, the applicant's disability must be expected to persist for at least 12 months.
How can I remember my rotator cuff test? ›- S: supraspinatus.
- I: infraspinatus.
- T: teres minor.
- S: subscapularis.
The special tests described in this review evaluate specific tendons of the rotator cuff. The Jobe's test and drop arm test evaluate the supraspintus whereas the lift-off test, passive lift-off, and external rotation lag signs assess the infraspinatus and teres minor.
What percentage of rotator cuff tears require surgery? ›When does a partial rotator cuff tear need surgery? It is very uncommon to operate on a partial rotator cuff tear. In cases of deep partial tears — when more than 90 percent of the tendon is torn — surgery is recommended only if the symptoms can't be controlled with nonsurgical treatments.
What is the gold standard for rotator cuff tears? ›Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the gold standard for evaluating rotator cuff tears (RCTs), providing information that is often not diagnosed on clinical examination and other complementary shoulder exams such as ultrasonography; however, the reliability of the diagnosis and the classification of some lesions ...
How do you answer a disability questionnaire? ›
- Write clearly and legibly. Avoid erasures as much as possible. ...
- Do not leave any section of the form blank (unless otherwise specified). ...
- Give consistent answers. ...
- Answer the questions truthfully. ...
- Follow the instructions on the form.
Can I get VA Disability for shoulder pain? Yes, as long as the shoulder pain is service-connected, you can qualify for VA Disability. It will be rated the minimum 10% unless there is limited motion that qualifies for a higher rating.
How can I get disability for shoulder pain? ›Many shoulder pain sufferers qualify for Social Security disability because they have a “major dysfunction of a joint.” In order to qualify pursuant to this Blue Book listing, a claimant must show that he has one of the following conditions: Partial shoulder dislocation. Partial or full fusing of the shoulder joints.
What are red flags in shoulder assessment? ›Red flags include: Trauma, pain and weakness, or sudden loss of ability to actively raise the arm (with or without trauma): suspect acute rotator cuff tear. Any shoulder mass or swelling: suspect malignancy. Red skin, painful joint, fever, or the person is systemically unwell: suspect septic arthritis.
What should a complete shoulder examination include? ›A complete physical examination includes inspection and palpation, assessment of range of motion and strength, and provocative shoulder testing for possible impingement syndrome and glenohumeral instability.
What is a good constant score? ›The outcome from shoulder arthroplasty in our unit has been evaluated using the constant score (CS) and the oxford shoulder score and these scores have been used to evaluate individual patient outcomes. CSs of < 30 = unsatisfactory; 30-39 = fair; 40-59 = good; 60-69 = very good; and 70 and over = excellent.
What are scoring metrics? ›Scoring metrics are measurements that reflect the performance of a scoring configuration or the service itself. Available metric items include the following: Service Scores. Total number of scores produced by the service.
How is the Spadi test scored? ›A SPADI total score ranging from 0 (best) to 100 (worst) is then produced by averaging the two subscale scores. If more than two items of a subscale are not responded to, no SPADI score is calculated.
How is Penn shoulder Score calculated? ›'' Points are awarded for each item by subtracting the number circled from the maximum of 10. Therefore, a patient is awarded 30 points for complete absence of pain. If a patient is not able to use the arm for normal or strenuous activities, 0 points are scored for that item.
How do you read a Spadi score? ›How severe is your pain? Circle the number that best describes your pain where: 0 = no pain and 10 = the worst pain imaginable. How much difficulty do you have? Circle the number that best describes your experience where: 0 = no difficulty and 10 = so difficult it requires help.
How do you score an Oxford shoulder? ›
It contains 12 items, each with 5 potential answers. A mark between 1 (best/fewest symptoms) and 5 (worst/most severe) is awarded to correspond to the patient's symptoms. The combined total gives a minimum score of 12 and a maximum of 60. A higher score implies a greater degree of disability.
What is a good Constant shoulder score? ›Its score ranges from 0 to 100 points, representing worst and best shoulder function, respectively. In the original publication, the pain experienced during normal activities of daily living was scored as: no pain = 15 points, mild = 10, moderate = 5 and severe = 0 points [1].
What is the maximum score on Spadi? ›The maximum possible score is 100, representing less pain and greater function. The SPADI is a subjective questionnaire that has pain and disability or function components. Roach and colleagues developed this scale using visual analogue scales to measure pain and function of the shoulder.
What is the disability rating scale for shoulder? ›The minimum permanent rating for a shoulder replacement is 30 percent for a dominant arm and 20 percent for a non-dominant arm, but you could get a rating as high as 50 or 60 percent, depending on your condition.
What is the quick dash assessment? ›The purpose of the QuickDASH is to use 11 items to measure physical function and symptoms in people with any or multiple musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb. The QuickDASH is a widely used reference of self reported disability.
What is the DASH outcome measure? ›The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Outcome Measure is a 30-item, self-report questionnaire designed to measure physical function and symptoms in patients with any or several musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb.
What is UCLA shoulder score? ›The University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Score (UCLASS), Constant Shoulder Score (CSS) and Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) are widely used for the evaluation of functional and quality-of-life outcomes after shoulder surgery, with good reliability and validity.
Is shoulder impingement considered a disability? ›If you can prove that your shoulder injury is serious enough that it leaves you unable to perform fine and gross movements, you may be eligible for disability. Symptoms you must have that cause severe chronic pain and limits movement include: Chronic joint pain or stiffness.
How is the pain disability questionnaire scored? ›The items of the questionnaire are assessed on a 0–10 numeric rating scale in which 0 means no disability and 10 is maximum disability. The sum of the seven items equals the total score of the PDI, which ranges from 0 to 70, with higher scores reflecting higher interference of pain with daily activities.
What is functional disability score? ›The total score determines the level of functional disability, in which higher numbers represent a higher level of disability. A score of 0 indicates that there are no neck complaints present whereas 30 indicates that the patient is extremely disabled as a result of the neck complaints.
What is Oxford shoulder score 48? ›
How would you describe the worst pain you had from your shoulder? The overall score is reached by simply summing the scores received for individual questions. This results in a continuous score ranging from 0 (most severe symptoms) to 48 (least symptoms).
How are Oxford scores calculated? ›Score each question (item) from 0 to 4 with 0 being the worst outcome and 4 being the best outcome. The scores are then summed to produce an overall score running from 0 (worst possible) to 48 (best outcome).