Youssef Saad (Department of Medicine and Health Science “Vincenzo Tiberio”, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy)
Giovinazzi Roberta (Department of Medicine and Health Science “Vincenzo Tiberio”, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy)
Corciulo Emanuele (Department of Medicine and Health Science “Vincenzo Tiberio”, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy)
Cozzo Remo (Department of Medicine and Health Science “Vincenzo Tiberio”, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy)
Venditti Francesca Maria Pia (Department of Medicine and Health Science “Vincenzo Tiberio”, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy)
Nigro Antonello (Department of Medicine and Health Science “Vincenzo Tiberio”, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy)
Giovannico Giuseppe (Department of Medicine and Health Science “Vincenzo Tiberio”, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy)
Tamborrino Andrea (Department of Medicine and Health Science “Vincenzo Tiberio”, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy)
Purpose: To explore shoulder experts’ perspective about how to label shoulder pain with uncertain etiopathogenesis, that is neither a frozen shoulder, an instability or osteoarthritis.
Semi structured interviews were conducted by two physical therapists. Fourteen international shoulder expert physiotherapists were interviewed online or in-person. The diagnostic labels examined were: subacromial impingement syndrome (SIS), subacromial pain syndrome (SPS), rotator cuff tendinopathy (RCT), rotator cuff related shoulder pain (RCRSP) and non-specific shoulder pain (NSSP). A thematic analysis was conducted through an inductive approach based on the AMEE framework.
To date, the most widely used and agreed upon labels by experts seem to be “RCT” and “RCRSP”. All experts recommended abandoning the diagnostic label SIS because it was considered obsolete and related to patient concern. There was also a complete agreement in supporting the inaccuracy of the labels “NSSP” and “SPS” as being generic, misleading and not reliable for the patients.
This qualitative study underpins the lack of uniformity regarding diagnostic label terminology. Moreover, the physiotherapists who were interviewed expressed their preferences regarding RCT and RCRSP. Probably, it would be more appropriate to abandon the utopian search for the perfect name. We should instead focus on thinking about a patient’s prognostic health profile according to a bio psycho social model.
Del Mar, Chris., Doust, Jenny. & Glasziou, P. Clinical thinking : evidence, communication and decision-making. 127 (2006).
Croft, P. et al. The science of clinical practice: Disease diagnosis or patient prognosis? Evidence about ‘what is likely to happen’ should
shape clinical practice. BMC Med 13, (2015).
Jutel, A. G. & Conrad, P. Putting a Name to it: Diagnosis in contemporary society. Putting a Name to it: Diagnosis in
Contemporary Society 1–175 (2011)
Bedson, J., McCarney, R. & Croft, P. Labelling chronic illness in primary care: A good or a bad thing. British Journal of General
Practice 54, 932–938 (2004).
Engel, G. L. The need for a new medical model: A challenge for biomedicine. Science (1979) 196, 129–136 (1977).
Rothstein, J. M. Guide to physical therapist practice: Second edition. Phys Ther 81, 6–597 (2001).
Aronowitz, R. A. (Robert A. Making sense of illness : science, society, and disease. 267.
Sims, R., Kazda, L., Michaleff, Z. A., Glasziou, P. & Thomas, R. Consequences of health condition labelling: Protocol for a systematic scoping review. BMJ Open 10, (2020).
Ludewig, P. M., Lawrence, R. L. & Braman, J. P. What’s in a name? Using movement system diagnoses versus pathoanatomic diagnoses. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 43, 280–3 (2013).
Bedson, J. et al. Labelling chronic illness in primary care: a good or a bad thing? The British Journal of General Practice 54, 932 (2004).
Ogden, J. et al. What’s in a name? An experimental study of patients’ views of the impact and function of a diagnosis. Fam Pract 20, 248–253 (2003).
Moynihan, R., Doust, J. & Henry, D. Preventing overdiagnosis: How to stop harming the healthy. BMJ (Online) 344, (2012).
Nickel, B., Barratt, A., Copp, T., Moynihan, R. & McCaffery, K. Words do matter: A systematic review on how different terminology for the same condition influences management preferences. BMJ Open 7, (2017).
Kale, M. S. & Korenstein, D. Overdiagnosis in primary care: framing the problem and finding solutions. BMJ 362, (2018).
Miller-Spoto, M. & Gombatto, S. P. Diagnostic labels assigned to patients with orthopedic conditions and the influence of the label on selection of interventions: A qualitative study of orthopaedic clinical specialists. Phys Ther 94, 776–791 (2014).
Zadro, J. R. et al. How do people perceive different labels for rotator cuff disease? A content analysis of data collected in a randomised controlled experiment. BMJ Open 11, (2021).
Schellingerhout, J. M., Verhagen, A. P., Thomas, S. & Koes, B. W. Lack of uniformity in diagnostic labeling of shoulder pain: Time for a different approach. Man Ther 13, 478–483 (2008).
Ristori, D. et al. Towards an integrated clinical framework for patient with shoulder pain. Arch Physiother 8, 7 (2018).
Lewis, J. & Powell, J. Should We Provide a Clinical Diagnosis for People with Shoulder Pain? Absolutely, Maybe, Never! The Ongoing Clinical Debate Between Leavers and Retainers. New Zealand Journal of Physiotherapy 50, 4–5 (2022).
