Shoulder disorders in general practice: incidence, patient characteristics, and management

D A van der Windt, B W Koes, B A de Jong, L M Bouter, D A van der Windt, B W Koes, B A de Jong, L M Bouter

Abstract

Objectives: To study the incidence and management of intrinsic shoulder disorders in Dutch general practice, and to evaluate which patient characteristics are associated with specific diagnostic categories.

Methods: In 11 general practices (35,150 registered patients) all consultations concerning shoulder complaints were registered during a period of one year. Patients with an intrinsic shoulder disorder who had not consulted their general practitioner for the complaint during the preceding year (incident cases) were asked to participate in an observational study. Participants completed a questionnaire regarding the nature and severity of their complaints. The general practitioners recorded data on diagnosis and therapy.

Results: The cumulative incidence of shoulder complaints in general practice was estimated to be 11.2/1000 patients/year (95% confidence limits 10.1 to 12.3). Rotator cuff tendinitis was the most frequently recorded disorder (29%). There were 349 incident cases enrolled in the observational study. Patient characteristics showed small variations between different diagnostic categories. Age, duration of symptoms, precipitating cause and restriction of movement seemed to be discriminating factors. Twenty two percent of all participants received injections during the first consultation; most (85%) were diagnosed as having bursitis. The majority of patients with tendinitis (53%) were referred for physiotherapy.

Conclusion: With respect to diagnosis and treatment, the practitioners generally appeared to follow the guidelines issued by the Dutch College of General Practitioners. Although the patient characteristics of specific disorders showed some similarities with the clinical pictures described in the literature, further research is required to demonstrate whether the proposed syndromes indeed constitute separate disorders with a different underlying pathology, requiring different treatment strategies.

References

    1. Arthritis Rheum. 1991 Jun;34(6):766-9
    1. Am Fam Physician. 1991 Feb;43(2):497-512
    1. Clin Sports Med. 1991 Oct;10(4):707-20
    1. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992 Jun;74(5):738-46
    1. Radiology. 1993 Feb;186(2):435-41
    1. Radiology. 1993 Sep;188(3):603-13
    1. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994 May;75(5):604-9
    1. Ann Rheum Dis. 1995 Feb;54(2):152-4
    1. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 May;48(5):691-704
    1. Scand J Rheumatol. 1975;4(4):193-6
    1. Am Fam Physician. 1981 Oct;24(4):59-61
    1. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983 Mar;(173):63-9
    1. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983 Mar;(173):70-7
    1. Ann Rheum Dis. 1984 Jun;43(3):361-4
    1. Phys Ther. 1987 Oct;67(10):1575
    1. Orthopedics. 1988 Jan;11(1):153-8
    1. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 Jun;(231):234-8
    1. Br J Rheumatol. 1988 Oct;27(5):385-9
    1. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 1989 Nov-Dec;127(6):643-9
    1. Baillieres Clin Rheumatol. 1989 Dec;3(3):437-51
    1. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990 May;(254):121-7
    1. BMJ. 1990 Mar 31;300(6728):848-9
    1. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 1991 Jul-Aug;129(4):322-5

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다