We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Controlled Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Critical evaluation of the 2-minute orthopedic screening examination.
American Journal of Diseases of Children 1993 October
OBJECTIVE: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of the 2-minute, 12-step, orthopedic screening examination.
DESIGN: Prospective, single-blind study.
SETTING: National Collegiate Athletic Association Division 1 athletics program.
PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred fifty-nine male and female varsity athletes.
INTERVENTIONS: The athletes were screened by five primary care physicians who were "blind" to each patient's history. The athletes were then evaluated by a team of orthopedic surgeons who had knowledge of each patient's history. Significant injuries were injuries that would limit participation, predispose to injury, or need further evaluation or rehabilitation.
MAIN RESULTS: A total of 120 significant injuries were identified by compiling the results of the history and both physical examinations. Of the significant injuries, 91.6% were detected by history alone. Fourteen of the significant injuries were missed by the detailed orthopedic examination, but they were detected by the screening examination. The overall sensitivity of the screening examination compared with the results of all three methods was 50.8%, with a specificity of 97.5%, positive predictive value of 40.9%, and negative predictive value of 98.3%. Almost half of the false-positive screening findings were shoulder asymmetries.
CONCLUSIONS: Even in mass screenings, the screening orthopedic examination should be used only in conjunction with an orthopedic history. Some modifications may improve the sensitivity of the screening examination.
DESIGN: Prospective, single-blind study.
SETTING: National Collegiate Athletic Association Division 1 athletics program.
PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred fifty-nine male and female varsity athletes.
INTERVENTIONS: The athletes were screened by five primary care physicians who were "blind" to each patient's history. The athletes were then evaluated by a team of orthopedic surgeons who had knowledge of each patient's history. Significant injuries were injuries that would limit participation, predispose to injury, or need further evaluation or rehabilitation.
MAIN RESULTS: A total of 120 significant injuries were identified by compiling the results of the history and both physical examinations. Of the significant injuries, 91.6% were detected by history alone. Fourteen of the significant injuries were missed by the detailed orthopedic examination, but they were detected by the screening examination. The overall sensitivity of the screening examination compared with the results of all three methods was 50.8%, with a specificity of 97.5%, positive predictive value of 40.9%, and negative predictive value of 98.3%. Almost half of the false-positive screening findings were shoulder asymmetries.
CONCLUSIONS: Even in mass screenings, the screening orthopedic examination should be used only in conjunction with an orthopedic history. Some modifications may improve the sensitivity of the screening examination.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app