Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33576312›Full record

ArticleSports health

Evaluating the Clinical Tests for Adolescent Tibial Bone Stress Injuries.

Eric D Nussbaum, Charles J Gatt, Jaynie Bjornarra, Chenyun Yang

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sports health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Eric D NussbaumDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rutgers, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Somerset, New Jersey.
Charles J GattDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rutgers, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Jaynie BjornarraSt Catherine University, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Chenyun YangRutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Johnson University · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · USSt. Catherine University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTibial bone stress injuries are common among the athletic adolescent population. A thorough patient history and clinical examination are essential to identify the location and extent of injury. However, there has been little description or any validation of clinical tests to help guide clinicians. Consequently, a formal diagnosis is usually dependent on results from proper imaging. HYPOTHESIS: Clinical examinations will be both highly sensitive and specific determining the incidence, grade, and location of tibial bone stress injury as compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). STUDY

designCase-control. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2.

methodsA total of 80 consecutive athletic adolescents, from various sports, with greater than 1-week history of shin pain were enrolled in this institutional review board-approved study. Exclusion criteria were age >19 years and history of traumatic injury. Patients underwent a standardized clinical examination, which included a fulcrum test (FT), tap/percussion test (TT), vibration test (VT) utilizing a 128-Hz tuning fork, weight bearing lunge test (WBLT) to determine degree of dorsiflexion range of motion (ROM), and vertical single leg hop test (VSLHT) for height, landing, and pain. Bilateral lower extremity MRI was completed on the same day as clinical evaluation and served as the injury reference. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated to evaluate each clinical examination for its ability to identify a bone stress injury.

resultsA total of 159 tibiae in 80 patients were evaluated. No single test or combination of tests was both highly sensitive and specific. Individual clinical tests demonstrated sensitivity ranging from 0.11 to 0.72 and specificity ranging from 0.37 to 0.93. The VSLHT noting an increase in pain was the most sensitive test (0.72; 95% CI, 0.62-0.78); however, its specificity was only 0.37 (95% CI, 0.19-0.55), with a PPV of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.78-0.91) and NPV of 0.20 (95% CI, 0.089-0.31). The WBLT demonstrated a mean ROM of 8 cm, with side-to-side differences (range 0-4 cm) not influencing incidence of injury. Combinations of tests demonstrated low sensitivity (0.03-0.40), with better specificity (0.63-1.0). When considering ability to identify higher grades of injury (grade III/IV), all tests had a high NPV indicating that if clinical tests were negative, there was a high likelihood that the patient did not have a grade III or IV injury.

conclusionNo single test or combination of tests was both highly sensitive and specific. Clinicians cannot solely rely on clinical examination for determining extent or severity of bone stress injury in the athletic adolescent population, but when combinations of tests are negative, there is likely not a high-grade bone stress injury. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinical tests utilized in the evaluation of adolescent tibial bone stress injury may help indicate the presence or absence of higher grade tibial bone stress injury.

Indexed as

AdolescentAthletic InjuriesCase-Control StudiesFemaleFractures, StressHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePhysical ExaminationPredictive Value of TestsSensitivity and SpecificityTibiaadolescentsbone stress injuryclinical examinationtibia

Identifiers

PMID33576312
PMCPMC8404772
OpenAlexW4213383889

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.