ArticleThe Permanente journal2025
Reliability of Hip and Shoulder Measurements Assessed via Telehealth Versus a Standard In-Person Visit Modality.
Article in The Permanente journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceptions, barriers, and costs related to telehealth among outpatient musculoskeletal patients.PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionRestricted in-person interaction throughout the pandemic coincided with increased reliance on telehealth for patient evaluation and treatment. However, few studies have investigated telehealth efficacy and accuracy compared with in-person musculoskeletal physical examination. Importantly, this virtual platform can be challenging for practitioners whose care relies on physical examination measurements. This study evaluated the validity and accuracy of measuring hip and shoulder strength and range of motion (ROM) via telehealth examination.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, 45 participants without hip or shoulder pain underwent an in-person physical examination and a telehealth examination. Hip and shoulder ROM were measured from in-person and telehealth examinations, using Halo goniometers (Halo Medical Devices) and virtual goniometers, respectively. Hip and shoulder strength were also assessed. Measures obtained from in-person and telehealth examinations were compared, and percent agreements were calculated.
resultsThe mean age of participants was 32.0 ± 7.2 years; 67% (n = 30) were female. Hip flexion strength, right hip abduction, and right shoulder strength had the strongest percent agreement (91.1%-100.0%) across in-person and telehealth modalities. Left hip abduction, left shoulder active abduction, shoulder internal ROM, and shoulder external ROM showed moderate-to-high agreement (26.7%-77.8%). Left (2.2%) and right hip (8.9%) external ROM showed poor agreement. DISCUSSION: Measurements with the greatest agreement between telehealth and in-person examinations included hip flexion, shoulder strength, hip abduction, and shoulder active abduction.
conclusionCertain strength and ROM tests can be accurately assessed via telehealth examination. Future research is needed to expand upon these findings and to develop a reliable, standardized protocol for the telehealth musculoskeletal physical examination.
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.