Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Outcome Measurement Tools for Functional Assessment of the Shoulder

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Shoulder Arthroscopy

  • 3014 Accesses

Abstract

The impact of shoulder injuries and treatments on patients is mostly measured during the clinical evaluation. Initially, simple questions inquire about pain, other symptoms, influence on function and treatment satisfaction. Next, a physical examination assesses the shoulder’s range of motion, strength, and stability before performing different provocative maneuvers evaluating for different pathologies. Finally, diagnostic imaging data is obtained and appraised first for injuries and deformity, and then later for signs of healing and prosthetic alignment and stability. The physician deciphers through all the clinical information to evaluate how the shoulder pathology is affecting the patient, determine treatment, and then gauge the effectiveness of their treatment on the patient.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 239.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Dowrick AS, Gabbe BJ, Williamson OD, Wolfe R, Cameron PA. A comparison of self-reported and independently observed disability in an orthopedic trauma population. J Trauma. 2006;61:1447–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Roos EM. Outcome after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction – a comparison of patients’ and surgeons’ assessments. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2001;11:287–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hoher J, Bach T, Munster A, Bouillon B, Tiling T. Does the mode of data collection change results in a subjective knee score? Self-administration versus interview. Am J Sports Med. 1997;25:642–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Richards RR. Chapter 7. Effectiveness evaluation of the shoulder. In: Rockwood Jr C, Matsen III F, Wirth M, editors. The shoulder. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 2009. p. 267–78.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hayes K, Walton JR, Szomor ZR, Murrel GA. Reliability of five methods for assessing shoulder range of motion. Aust J Physiother. 2001;47:289–94.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Terwee CB, de Winter AF, Scholten RJ, Jans MP, Devillè W, van Schaardenburg D, et al. Interobserver reproducibility of the visual estimate of range of motion of the shoulder. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:1356–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rudiger HA, Fuchs B, von Campe A, Gerber C. Measurements of shoulder mobility by patient and surgeon correlate poorly: a prospective study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008;17:255–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hickey BW, Milosavljevic S, Bell ML, Milburn PD. Accuracy and reliability of observational motion analysis in identifying shoulder symptoms. Man Ther. 2007;12:263–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ostor AJ, Richards CA, Prevost AT, Hazleman BL, Speed CA. Interrater reproducibility of clinical tests for rotator cuff lesions. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63:1288–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tzannes A, Paxinos A, Callanan M, Murrell GA. An assessment of the interexaminer reliability of tests for shoulder instability. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2004;13:18–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kocher MS, Steadman JR, Briggs KK, Sterett WI, Hawkins RJ. Relationships between objective assessment of ligament stability and subjective assessment of symptoms and function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32: 629–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Beaton DE, Schemitsch E. Measures of health-related quality of life and physical function. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;413:90–105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Patel AA, Donegan D, Albert T. The 36-item short form. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2007;15:126–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Swiontkowski MF, Buckwalter JA, Keller RB, Haralson R. The outcomes movement in orthopaedic surgery: where we are and where we should go. J Bone Joint Surg. 1999;81A:732–40.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gartsman GM, Brinker MR, Khan M, Karahan M. Self-assessment of general health status in patients with five common shoulder conditions. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1998;7:228–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. SooHoo NF, McDonald AP, Seiler 3rd JG, McGillivary GR. Evaluation of the construct validity of the DASH questionnaire by correlation to the SF-36. J Hand Surg Am. 2002;27:537–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Portney L, Watkins M, editors. Foundations of clinical research: application to practice. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall Inc; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25:3186–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Roach K. Measurement of health outcomes: reliability, validity and responsiveness. J Prosthet Orthot. 2006;18:8–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Finch E, Brooks D, Stratford P, Mayo N, editors. Physical rehabilitation outcome measures: a guide to enhanced clinical decision making. 2nd ed. Hamilton: Canadian Physiotherapy Association; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Katz JN, Wright JG. A taxonomy for responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:1204–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Reips UD, Funke F. Interval-level measurement with visual analogue scales in Internet-based research: VAS generator. Behav Res Methods. 2008;40:699–704.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wright RW. Knee injury outcomes measures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009;17:31–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Tarlov AR, Ware Jr JE, Greenfield S, Nelson EC, Perrin E, Zubkoff M. The Medical Outcomes Study. An application of methods for monitoring the results of medical care. JAMA. 1989;262:925–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Naughton MJ, Anderson RT. Outcomes research in orthopaedics: health-related quality of life and the SF-36. Arthroscopy. 1998;14:127–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Stewart AL, Hays RD, Ware Jr JE. The MOS short-form general health survey. Reliability and validity in a patient population. Med Care. 1988;26:724–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones NM, O’Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Usherwood T, et al. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ. 1992;305: 160–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Garratt AM, Ruta DA, Abdalla MI, Buckingham JK, Russell IT. The SF36 health survey questionnaire: an outcome measure suitable for routine use within the NHS? BMJ. 1993;306:1440–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Anderson RT, Aaronson NK, Wilkin D. Critical review of the international assessments of health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res. 1993;2:369–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. McKee MD, Yoo DJ. The effect of surgery for rotator cuff disease on general health status. Results of a prospective trial. J Bone Joint Surg. 2000;82A:970–9.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Henn 3rd RF, Kang L, Tashjian RZ, Green A. Patients with workers’ compensation claims have worse outcomes after rotator cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg. 2008;90A:2105–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Smith KL, Harryman 2nd DT, Antoniou J, Campbell B, Sidles JA, Matsen 3rd FA. A prospective, multipractice study of shoulder function and health status in patients with documented rotator cuff tears. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2000;9:395–402.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Crane PK, Hart DL, Gibbons LE, Cook KF. A 37-item shoulder functional status item pool had negligible differential item functioning. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:478–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Gartsman GM, Brinker MR, Khan M. Early effectiveness of arthroscopic repair for full-thickness tears of the rotator cuff: an outcome analysis. J Bone Joint Surg. 1998;80A:33–40.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Beaton DE, Katz JN, Fossel AH, Wright JG, Tarasuk V, Bombardier C. Measuring the whole or the parts? Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand outcome measure in different regions of the upper extremity. J Hand Ther. 2001;14:128–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Hunsaker FG, Cioffi DA, Amadio PC, Wright JG, Caughlin B. The American academy of orthopaedic surgeons outcomes instruments: normative values from the general population. J Bone Joint Surg. 2002;84A:208–15.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Angst F, Pap G, Mannion AF, Herren DB, Aeschlimann A, Schwyzer HK, et al. Comprehensive assessment of clinical outcome and quality of life after total shoulder arthroplasty: usefulness and validity of subjective outcome measures. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;51:819–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. McConnel S, Beaton DE, Bombardier C, editors. Disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand: the DASH outcome measure user’s manual. Toronto: Institute for Work & Health; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  39. MacDermid JC, Solomon P, Prkachin K. The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index demonstrates factor, construct and longitudinal validity. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006;7:12.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Getahun T, MacDermid JC. Concurrent validity of patient rating scales in assessment of outcome after rotator cuff repair. J Musculoskelet Res. 2000;119:27.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Navsarikar A, Gladman DD, Husted JA, Cook RJ. Validity assessment of the disabilities of arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire (DASH) for patients with psoriatic arthritis. J Rheum. 1999;26:2191–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Schmitt JS, Di Fabio RP. Reliable change and minimum important difference (MID) proportions facilitated group responsiveness comparisons using individual threshold criteria. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:1008–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Dowrick AS, Gabbe BJ, Williamson OD, Cameron PA. Does the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) scoring system only measure disability due to injuries to the upper limb? J Bone Joint Surg. 2006;88B:524–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Amstutz HC, Sew Hoy AL, Clarke IC. UCLA anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1981;155:7–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Wright RW, Heller MA, Quick DC, Buss DD. Arthroscopic decompression for impingement syndrome secondary to an unstable os acromiale. Arthroscopy. 2000;16:595–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Romeo AA, Mazzocca A, Hang DW, Shott S, Bach Jr BR. Shoulder scoring scales for the evaluation of rotator cuff repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;427:107–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. O’Connor DA, Chipchase LS, Tomlinson J, Krishnan J. Arthroscopic subacromial decompression: responsiveness of disease-specific and health-related quality of life outcome measures. Arthroscopy. 1999;15:836–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Krepler P, Wanivenhaus AH, Wurnig C. Outcome assessment of hemiarthroplasty of the shoulder: a 5-year follow-up with 4 evaluation tools. Acta Orthop. 2006;77:778–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Fealy S, Kingham TP, Altchek DW. Mini-open rotator cuff repair using a two-row fixation technique: outcomes analysis in patients with small, moderate, and large rotator cuff tears. Arthroscopy. 2002;18:665–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Kirkley A, Griffin S, Dainty K. Scoring systems for the functional assessment of the shoulder. Arthroscopy. 2003;19:1109–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Wright RW, Baumgarten KM. Shoulder outcomes measures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010;18:436–44.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Constant CR, Gerber C, Emery RJ, Sojbjerg JO, Gohlke F, Boileau P. A review of the Constant score: modifications and guidelines for its use. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008;17:355–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Constant CR, Murley AH. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987;214:160–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Conboy VB, Morris RW, Kiss J, Carr AJ. An evaluation of the Constant-Murley shoulder assessment. J Bone Joint Surg. 1996;78B:229–32.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Bankes MJ, Crossman JE, Emery RJ. A standard method of shoulder strength measurement for the Constant score with a spring balance. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1998;7:116–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Fialka C, Oberleitner G, Stampfl P, Brannath W, Hexel M, Vecsei V. Modification of the Constant-Murley shoulder score-introduction of the individual relative Constant score individual shoulder assessment. Injury. 2005;36:1159–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Walton MJ, Walton JC, Honorez LA, Harding VF, Wallace WA. A comparison of methods for shoulder strength assessment and analysis of Constant score change in patients aged over fifty years in the United Kingdom. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16:285–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Brinker MR, Cuomo JS, Popham GJ, O’Connor DP, Barrack RL. An examination of bias in shoulder scoring instruments among healthy collegiate and recreational athletes. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11:463–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Katolik LI, Romeo AA, Cole BJ, Verma NN, Hayden JK, Bach BR. Normalization of the Constant score. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005;14:279–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Othman A, Taylor G. Is the constant score reliable in assessing patients with frozen shoulder? 60 shoulders scored 3 years after manipulation under anaesthesia. Acta Orthop Scand. 2004;75:114–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Baker P, Nanda R, Goodchild L, Finn P, Rangan A. A comparison of the Constant and Oxford shoulder scores in patients with conservatively treated proximal humeral fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008;17:37–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Richards RR, An KN, Bigliani LU, Friedman RJ, Gartsman GM, Gristina AG, et al. A standardized method for the assessment of shoulder function. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1994;3:347–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Michener LA, Leggin BG. A review of self-report scales for the assessment of functional limitation and disability of the shoulder. J Hand Ther. 2001;14:68–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Michener LA, McClure PW, Sennett BJ. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, patient self-report section: reliability, validity, and responsiveness. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11:587–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Sallay PI, Reed L. The measurement of normative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2003;12:622–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Kocher MS, Horan MP, Briggs KK, Richardson TR, O’Holleran J, Hawkins RJ. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons subjective shoulder scale in patients with shoulder instability, rotator cuff disease, and glenohumeral arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg. 2005;87A:2006–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Tashjian RZ, Deloach J, Green A, Porucznik CA, Powell AP. Minimal clinically important differences in ASES and simple shoulder test scores after nonoperative treatment of rotator cuff disease. J Bone Joint Surg. 2010;92A:296–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Angst F, Goldhahn J, Drerup S, Aeschlimann A, Schwyzer HK, Simmen BR. Responsiveness of six outcome assessment instruments in total shoulder arthroplasty. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59:391–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Beaton DE, Richards RR. Measuring function of the shoulder. A cross-sectional comparison of five questionnaires. J Bone Joint Surg. 1996;78A:882–90.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Placzek JD, Lukens SC, Badalanmenti S, Roubal PJ, Freeman DC, Walleman KM, et al. Shoulder outcome measures: a comparison of 6 functional tests. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32:1270–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Roach KE, Budiman-Mak E, Songsiridej N, Lertratanakul Y. Development of a shoulder pain and disability index. Arthritis Care Res. 1991;4:143–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Roy JS, MacDermid JC, Woodhouse LJ. Measuring shoulder function: a systematic review of four questionnaires. Arthritis Rheum. 2009;61:623–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Williams Jr JW, Holleman Jr DR, Simel DL. Measuring shoulder function with the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index. J Rheumatol. 1995;22:727–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Ekeberg OM, Bautz-Holter E, Tveita EK, Keller A, Juel NG, Brox JI. Agreement, reliability and validity in 3 shoulder questionnaires in patients with rotator cuff disease. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2008;9:68.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Christie A, Dagfinrud H, Engen Matre K, Flaatten HI, Ringen Osnes H, Hagen KB. Surgical interventions for the rheumatoid shoulder. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(1):CD006188.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Staples MP, Forbes A, Green S, Buchbinder R. Shoulder-specific disability measures showed acceptable construct validity and responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:163–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Tveita EK, Ekeberg OM, Juel NG, Bautz-Holter E. Responsiveness of the shoulder pain and disability index in patients with adhesive capsulitis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2008;9:161.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Angst F, Goldhahn J, Pap G, Mannion AF, Roach KE, Siebertz D, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the German Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI). Rheumatology (Oxford). 2007;46:87–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Paul A, Lewis M, Shadforth MF, Croft PR, Van Der Windt DA, Hay EM. A comparison of four shoulder-specific questionnaires in primary care. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63:1293–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Breckenridge JD, McAuley JH. Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI). J Physiother. 2011;57:197.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Roddey TS, Olson SL, Cook KF, Gartsman GM, Hanten W. Comparison of the University of California-Los Angeles Shoulder Scale and the Simple Shoulder Test with the shoulder pain and disability index: single-administration reliability and validity. Phys Ther. 2000;80:759–68.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Beaton D, Richards RR. Assessing the reliability and responsiveness of 5 shoulder questionnaires. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1998;7:565–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Godfrey J, Hamman R, Lowenstein S, Briggs K, Kocher M. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the simple shoulder test: psychometric properties by age and injury type. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16:260–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Angst F, Schwyzer HK, Aeschlimann A, Simmen BR, Goldhahn J. Measures of adult shoulder function: Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH) and its short version (QuickDASH), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Society standardized shoulder assessment form, Constant (Murley) Score (CS), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), Shoulder Disability Questionnaire (SDQ), and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI). Arthritis Care Res. 2011;63:S174–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Cook KF, Gartsman GM, Roddey TS, Olson SL. The measurement level and trait-specific reliability of 4 scales of shoulder functioning: an empiric investigation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82: 1558–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Roy JS, Macdermid JC, Faber KJ, Drosdowech DS, Athwal GS. The simple shoulder test is responsive in assessing change following shoulder arthroplasty. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2010;40:413–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Williams GN, Gangel TJ, Arciero RA, Uhorchak JM, Taylor DC. Comparison of the single assessment numeric evaluation method and two shoulder rating scales. Outcomes measures after shoulder surgery. Am J Sports Med. 1999;27:214–21.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Barber FA. Long-term results of acromioclavicular joint coplaning. Arthroscopy. 2006;22:125–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Kerr BJ, McCarty EC. Outcome of arthroscopic debridement is worse for patients with glenohumeral arthritis of both sides of the joint. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:634–8.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Jones KJ, Wiesel B, Ganley TJ, Wells L. Functional outcomes of early arthroscopic bankart repair in adolescents aged 11 to 18 years. J Pediatr Orthop. 2007;27:209–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Brophy RH, Beauvais RL, Jones EC, Cordasco FA, Marx RG. Measurement of shoulder activity level. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;439:101–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Brophy RH, Levy B, Chu S, Dahm DL, Sperling JW, Marx RG. Shoulder activity level varies by diagnosis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2009;17:1516–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Lo IK, Griffin S, Kirkley A. The development of a disease-specific quality of life measurement tool for osteoarthritis of the shoulder: The Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2001;9:771–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Kirkley A, Griffin S, McLintock H, Ng L. The development and evaluation of a disease-specific quality of life measurement tool for shoulder instability. The Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI). Am J Sports Med. 1998;26:764–72.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Kirkley A, Alvarez C, Griffin S. The development and evaluation of a disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaire for disorders of the rotator cuff: the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index. Clin J Sport Med. 2003;13:84–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Hollinshead RM, Mohtadi NG, Vande Guchte RA, Wadey VM. Two 6-year follow-up studies of large and massive rotator cuff tears: comparison of outcome measures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2000;9:373–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Mohtadi NG, Hollinshead RM, Sasyniuk TM, Fletcher JA, Chan DS, Li FX. A randomized clinical trial comparing open to arthroscopic acromioplasty with mini-open rotator cuff repair for full-thickness rotator cuff tears: disease-specific quality of life outcome at an average 2-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36:1043–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, General Internal Medicine and Public Health, Institute for Medicine and Public Health, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 2525 West End Avenue, Twelfth Floor, Suite 1200, Nashville, TN, 37203, USA

    Warren R. Dunn MD, MPH

  2. Orthopaedics/Sports Medicine, Midwest Bone, Joint and Spine Institute, 10719 West 160th St., Orland Park, IL, 60467, USA

    James P. Leonard MD

Authors
  1. Warren R. Dunn MD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James P. Leonard MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Warren R. Dunn MD, MPH .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics, Catholic University of Rome, Rome, Roma, Italy

    Giuseppe Milano

  2. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Casa di Cura Villa Valeria, Rome, Roma, Italy

    Andrea Grasso

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dunn, W.R., Leonard, J.P. (2014). Outcome Measurement Tools for Functional Assessment of the Shoulder. In: Milano, G., Grasso, A. (eds) Shoulder Arthroscopy. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-5427-3_50

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-5427-3_50

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-5426-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-5427-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation