ArticleJoint diseases and related surgery2024
Are acromiohumeral distance measurements on conventional radiographs reliable? A prospective study of inter-method agreement with ultrasonography, and assessment of observer variability.
Article in Joint diseases and related surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comparison of two mobilization approaches on the acromiohumeral distance in overhead athletes with primary subacromial impingement syndrome: a randomized clinical study.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2026Trial
- Outcomes of partial vs. complete repair for large to massive rotator cuff tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Review
- Could a New Method of Acromiohumeral Distance Measurement Emerge? Artificial Intelligence vs. Physician.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Postoperative infraspinatus contractility is associated with acromiohumeral distance after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Observational
- Acromiohumeral Distance as a Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarker for Shoulder Disorders: A Systematic Review-Acromiohumeral Distance and Shoulder Disorders.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Review
- Possibility of diagnosing rotator cuff tears in areas with scarce medical resources: can non-standard anteroposterior radiographs accurately predict rotator cuff tears?Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to investigate the reliability of acromiohumeral distance (AHD) measurements using conventional radiographs and to compare non-standardized and standardized radiographs with intra-/interobserver reliability measurements. PATIENTS AND
methodsBetween February 2021 and January 2022, a total of 110 shoulders of 55 patients (25 males, 30 females; mean age: 49.7±12.6 years; range, 25 to 77 years) were included. Radiographs were taken in four different positions: primarily shoulder anteroposterior (AP), true AP, standardized true AP, and standardized outlet views. The AHD was measured by three orthopedists. A prospective ultrasonography (US) evaluation was performed by an experienced physiatrist, and the relationship between US and radiographic measurements was evaluated. The intra- and interobserver reliability of radiographic measurements was assessed.
resultsOn the standardized true AP view measurements, all observers showed a moderate to good agreement with US measurements (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC]: 0.68-0.75). There was no significant difference between the AHD measurements of the senior orthopedist on standardized true AP and outlet views, and the US measurements. The intraobserver agreement of US measurements was excellent (ICC: 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98-0.99), and the intraobserver agreement level of measurements on radiographs were good to excellent with a wide range of ICC values (ICC: 0.79-0.97). Interobserver reliability was the highest on the standardized outlet view, with an ICC of 0.91 and 0.88 in two measurement times. Interobserver reliability of other measurements were good with ICC values ranging from 0.82 to 0.88.
conclusionThe AHD measurements on radiographs are compatible with US measurements within up to 2 mm difference if standardization is ensured. Also, measurements on standardized views have a superior consistency with lower standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change values. Therefore, we recommend using standardized true shoulder AP and standardized outlet radiographs in clinical practice and studies, as these are the most accurate in demonstrating true AHD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.