Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21740540›Full record

Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2011

The Maastricht Ultrasound Shoulder pain trial (MUST): ultrasound imaging as a diagnostic triage tool to improve management of patients with non-chronic shoulder pain in primary care.

Ramon P G Ottenheijm, Manuela A Joore, Geert H I M Walenkamp, René E Weijers, Bjorn Winkens, Jochen W L Cals, Rob A de Bie, Geert-Jan Dinant

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Role of Ultrasound in the Detection of Rotator-Cuff Syndrome: An Observational Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2019
    Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ramon P G OttenheijmDepartment of General Practice, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Maastricht University Hospital, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands. ramon.ottenheijm@maastrichtuniversity.nl
Manuela A Joore
Geert H I M Walenkamp
René E Weijers
Bjorn Winkens
Jochen W L Cals
Rob A de Bie
Geert-Jan Dinant
Maastricht University · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSubacromial disorders are considered to be one of the most common pathologies affecting the shoulder. Optimal therapy for shoulder pain (SP) in primary care is yet unknown, since clinical history and physical examination do not provide decisive evidence as to the patho-anatomical origin of the symptoms. Optimal decision strategies can be furthered by applying ultrasound imaging (US), an accurate method in diagnosing SP, demonstrating a clear relationship between diagnosis and available therapies. Yet, the clinical cost-effectiveness of applying US in the management of SP in primary care has not been studied. The aim of this paper is to describe the design and methods of a trial assessing the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound imaging as a diagnostic triage tool to improve management of primary care patients with non-chronic shoulder pain. METHODS/

designThis randomised controlled trial (RCT) will involve 226 adult patients with suspected subacromial disorders recruited by general practitioners. During a Qualification period of two weeks, patients receive care as usual as advised by the Dutch College of General Practitioners, and patients are referred for US. Patients with insufficient improvement qualify for the RCT. These patients are then randomly assigned to the intervention or the control group. The therapies used in both groups are the same (corticosteroid injections, referral to a physiotherapist or orthopedic surgeon) except that therapies used in the intervention group will be tailored based on the US results. Ultrasound diagnosed disorders include tendinopathy, calcific tendinitis, partial and full thickness tears, and subacromial bursitis. The primary outcome is patient-perceived recovery at 52 weeks, using the Global Perceived Effect questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are disease specific and generic quality of life, cost-effectiveness, and the adherence to the initial applied treatment. Outcome measures will be assessed at baseline, 13, 26, 39 and 52 weeks after inclusion. An economic evaluation will be performed from both a health care and societal perspective with a time horizon of 52 weeks. DISCUSSION: The results of this trial will give unique evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of US as a diagnostic triage tool in the management of SP in primary care.

Indexed as

AdultCost-Benefit AnalysisDisability EvaluationFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleNetherlandsPrimary Health CareShoulder Impingement SyndromeShoulder PainSurveys and QuestionnairesTriageUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID21740540
PMCPMC3141612
OpenAlexW2028014045

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.