Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38650721›Full record

ArticleHealth science reports2024

Level of diagnostic agreement in musculoskeletal shoulder diagnosis between remote and face-to-face consultations: A retrospective service evaluation.

Louise Cockburn, Gill Baer, Jenna Rhodes

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Louise CockburnDivision of Dietetics Nutrition Biological Sciences Physiotherapy Podiatry and Radiography Queen Margaret University Musselburgh UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2713-4645
Gill BaerDivision of Dietetics Nutrition Biological Sciences Physiotherapy Podiatry and Radiography Queen Margaret University Musselburgh UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1528-2851
Jenna RhodesDivision of Dietetics Nutrition Biological Sciences Physiotherapy Podiatry and Radiography Queen Margaret University Musselburgh UK.
Queen Margaret University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Aims: To determine the level of diagnostic agreement between remote and face-to-face consultation in assessing shoulder complaints. Methods: A retrospective service evaluation with three groups of patient data; those assessed only face-to-face (group 1), remotely then face-to-face (group 2), remotely only (group 3). Patient data were extracted from 6 secondary care shoulder Advanced Physiotherapy Practitioner's (APPs) records, covering six sites. Three-hundred-and-fifty-nine sets of patient data were included in the final evaluation. The main outcome measure was the percentage of agreement between diagnosis at initial and follow-up consultation, when assessed by APPs across the three groups. A Pearson Results: There was exact agreement of 77.05% and 85.52% for groups 1 and 3, respectively, compared with 34.93% for patient data in group 2. Similar clinical impressions across both initial and follow-up were seen 16.39% of the time in group 1, 7.24% of the time in group 3, and 36.99% in group 2. Lastly, the percentage of times a diagnosis was changed between initial and review appointments occurred in only 6.56% of group 1 contacts, 7.24% of group 3 contacts, but 28.08% of the time in group 2. Conclusion: There was a large mismatch in the diagnosis of musculoskeletal shoulder complaints, when patients are initially assessed remotely and then followed-up in-person. This has implications for the future provision of shoulder assessment in physiotherapy.

Indexed as

diagnosismusculoskeletal disordersphysiotherapyremoteshouldertelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID38650721
PMCPMC11033340
OpenAlexW4395013894

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.