Skip to main content

The utility of clinical measures for the diagnosis of achilles tendon injuries: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Reiman, M; Burgi, C; Strube, E; Prue, K; Ray, K; Elliott, A; Goode, A
Published in: J Athl Train
2014

OBJECTIVE: To summarize and evaluate the current diagnostic accuracy of clinical measures used to diagnose Achilles tendon injuries. DATA SOURCES: A literature search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE databases was conducted with key words related to diagnostic accuracy and Achilles tendon injuries. STUDY SELECTION: Original research articles investigating Achilles tendon injuries against an acceptable reference standard were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Three studies met the inclusion criteria. Quality assessment was conducted using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models were used to pool sensitivity (SN), specificity (SP), and diagnostic odds ratios with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). DATA SYNTHESIS: The SN and negative likelihood ratio (-LR) values for Achilles tendon rupture measures ranged from 0.73 (95% CI = 0.65, 0.81) and 0.30 (95% CI = 0.23, 0.40) to 0.96 (95% CI = 0.93, 0.99) and 0.04 (95% CI = 0.02, 0.10), respectively, whereas SP and positive likelihood ratio (+LR) values ranged from 0.85 (95% CI = 0.72, 0.98) and 6.29 (95% CI = 2.33, 19.96) to 0.93 (95% CI = 0.84, 1.00) and 13.71 (95% CI = 3.54, 51.24), respectively, with the highest SN and SP both reported in the calf-squeeze test. The SN and -LR values for Achilles tendinopathy measures ranged from 0.03 (95% CI = 0.00, 0.08) and 0.97 (95% CI = not reported) to 0.89 (95% CI = 0.75, 0.98) and 0.19 (95% CI = not reported), whereas SP and +LR values ranged from 0.58 (95% CI = 0.38, 0.77) and 2.12 (95% CI = not reported) to 1.00 (95% CI = 1.00, 1.00) and infinity, respectively, with the highest SN and SP reported for morning stiffness and palpation for crepitus. Pooled analyses demonstrated similar diagnostic properties in all 3 clinical measures (arc sign, palpation, and Royal London Hospital test), with SN and -LR ranging from 0.42 (95% CI = 0.23, 0.62) and 0.68 (95% CI = 0.50, 0.93), respectively, for the arc sign, to 0.64 (95% CI = 0.44, 0.81) and 0.48 (95% CI = 0.29, 0.80), respectively, for palpation. Pooled SP and +LR ranged from 0.81 (95% CI = 0.65, 0.91) and 3.15 (95% CI = 1.61, 6.18), respectively, for palpation, to 0.88 (95% CI = 0.74, 0.96) SP for the arc sign and 3.84 (95% CI = 1.69, 8.73) +LR for the Royal London Hospital test. CONCLUSIONS: Most clinical measures for Achilles tendon injury have greater diagnostic than screening capability.

Duke Scholars

Altmetric Attention Stats
Dimensions Citation Stats

Published In

J Athl Train

DOI

EISSN

1938-162X

Publication Date

2014

Volume

49

Issue

6

Start / End Page

820 / 829

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Tendon Injuries
  • Symptom Assessment
  • Sport Sciences
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Reference Standards
  • Quality Assurance, Health Care
  • Humans
  • Achilles Tendon
  • 4207 Sports science and exercise
  • 4201 Allied health and rehabilitation science
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Reiman, M., Burgi, C., Strube, E., Prue, K., Ray, K., Elliott, A., & Goode, A. (2014). The utility of clinical measures for the diagnosis of achilles tendon injuries: a systematic review with meta-analysis. J Athl Train, 49(6), 820–829. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-49.3.36
Reiman, Michael, Ciara Burgi, Eileen Strube, Kevin Prue, Keaton Ray, Amanda Elliott, and Adam Goode. “The utility of clinical measures for the diagnosis of achilles tendon injuries: a systematic review with meta-analysis.J Athl Train 49, no. 6 (2014): 820–29. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-49.3.36.
Reiman M, Burgi C, Strube E, Prue K, Ray K, Elliott A, et al. The utility of clinical measures for the diagnosis of achilles tendon injuries: a systematic review with meta-analysis. J Athl Train. 2014;49(6):820–9.
Reiman, Michael, et al. “The utility of clinical measures for the diagnosis of achilles tendon injuries: a systematic review with meta-analysis.J Athl Train, vol. 49, no. 6, 2014, pp. 820–29. Pubmed, doi:10.4085/1062-6050-49.3.36.
Reiman M, Burgi C, Strube E, Prue K, Ray K, Elliott A, Goode A. The utility of clinical measures for the diagnosis of achilles tendon injuries: a systematic review with meta-analysis. J Athl Train. 2014;49(6):820–829.

Published In

J Athl Train

DOI

EISSN

1938-162X

Publication Date

2014

Volume

49

Issue

6

Start / End Page

820 / 829

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Tendon Injuries
  • Symptom Assessment
  • Sport Sciences
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Reference Standards
  • Quality Assurance, Health Care
  • Humans
  • Achilles Tendon
  • 4207 Sports science and exercise
  • 4201 Allied health and rehabilitation science