Methods
Participants (both controls and shoulder pain group) were recruited from community-based settings. Controls were men and women aged over 18 years, and included if they were free of shoulder pain over the last year, had full pain-free range of motion (ROM), did not have neurological or systemic rheumatological disorders, history of shoulder fracture, dislocation or surgery or any contraindications to ultrasound imaging. Shoulder pain participants were men and women aged over 18 years with a current history of unilateral shoulder pain, but still able to undertake some physical exercise with their shoulder (defined as 15 min of moderate arm exercise, such as tennis or housework). They were excluded if they had bilateral shoulder pain, had ever undergone shoulder surgery, had >50% restriction of shoulder ROM (to rule out frozen shoulder), had any neurological or systemic rheumatological disorders or contraindications to ultrasound imaging. The study received ethical approval from the relevant Research Ethics Committee and all volunteers provided written informed consent.
The diagnosis of RC tendinopathy is challenging, with both imaging-based and clinical diagnostic approaches having significant flaws.13 While Hegedus et al reported that no shoulder clinical diagnostic tests in isolation provide an accurate diagnosis of pathology,14 a combination of five tests (painful arc, empty can, external rotation resistance, Neer and Hawkins and Kennedy) were best able to predict RC tendinopathy.15 A cut-off of three out of five positive tests was used to clinically confirm RC pathology,15 while less than three positive tests ruled it out. Control participants were required to have a maximum of two positive tests, with a minimum of three positive tests in the pain group. Tendon pathology has been reported in many imaging studies of symptom-free shoulders.13 To best reflect current clinical practice, we combined both clinical and ultrasound diagnoses for the symptomatic participants.
Ultrasound examinations were undertaken using a GE Logiq e ultrasound scanner (GE Medical, Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, USA), with a 12 MHz linear probe, by a physiotherapist also qualified as a musculoskeletal sonographer, specialising in shoulder and tendon imaging. To enhance validity, static ultrasound images were independently reviewed by a radiologist to confirm imaging diagnoses for the symptomatic group. To produce as homogeneous sample as possible, control participants were excluded at this stage if any tendinopathy (loss of the normal fibrillar structure of the tendon with an abnormally hypoechoic appearance), partial tear of the SsT (flattening of the tendon surface or presence of hypoechoic defect within, or on either surface of, the tendon) or full-thickness tears (focal defect extending from the bursal to the humeral side of the tendon, or complete non-visualisation of the tendon) was found. Only one control volunteer (who had met the clinical testing criteria) was excluded using these criteria. For participants with unilateral shoulder symptoms, the painful shoulder was required to show some evidence of tendon pathology, however volunteers with full-thickness tears were excluded.
All participants provided details of their age, height and weight. Those with shoulder pain recorded the nature and duration of their shoulder pain. A Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NRS) for average shoulder pain intensity,16 and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) to assess shoulder disability,17 were also completed. The NRS was completed again at 24 hours postexercise.
Measurement of the SsT thickness and AHD were undertaken according to a previously published reliable protocol, with minimal detectable difference (MDD) values of 0.7 mm for AHD and 0.6 mm for SsT thickness.18 For the AHD measures, the participant was sitting, shoulder neutral, with the hand resting on the lap. An ultrasound image was taken with the transducer positioned along the line of the humerus, over the anterior part of the acromion, with the subacromial space and humeral head visible. The AHD was then measured as the shortest distance between the inferolateral edge of the anterior acromion and the humeral head, parallel to the acoustic shadow cast by the acromion.18
For the SsT measures, the arm was placed into the modified Crass position that is, palm of the hand on the iliac crest, with the elbow directed posteriorly. The SsT was viewed in the transverse plane, the transducer was moved anteriorly until the intra-articular portion of the long head of biceps was seen, at which point the image was taken. On-screen callipers were used to measure between the echogenic tendon boundaries, at points 5, 10 and 15 mm posterior to the edge of the biceps tendon, with the mean of these measures used for analysis. Subacromial occupation ratio expresses the relationship between tendon thickness and the space occupied, calculated by dividing SsT thickness by the AHD, expressed as a percentage. A normal subacromial bursa is either invisible or measures <2 mm on ultrasound.19 In this study, no participant had a subacromial bursa thicker than 2 mm at baseline or after exercise, therefore no further analysis of bursal thickness was carried out.
Measures of AHD and SsT thickness were obtained immediately before, and then at three intervals (1, 6 and 24 hours) postexercise. All images were taken by the same examiner, with the participant in the same position. All scans were coded to ensure blinding to group allocation and time the scan was taken at.
Immediately after the initial ultrasound measurements, participants performed the loading protocol in a seated position using an isokinetic dynamometer (System 3, Biodex Medical Systems, Shirley, New York, USA). The shoulder pain group exercised the painful shoulder; the control group exercised the shoulder randomly chosen by coin toss. Participants undertook a 5 min shoulder warm-up, involving range of motion exercises. The loading protocol involved two bouts of exercise; one of concentric and eccentric shoulder abduction, and a second of concentric and eccentric shoulder external rotation; with order of completion determined randomly by coin toss. The isokinetic protocol was based on that described by Roy et al,
20 where 60 repetitions at 60°/s resulted in mean fatigue levels of 38% for external rotation. For this study, we increased the speed to 120°/s in order to increase the tendon loading, and set the fatigue level at a 35% drop in overall torque for each of the exercise bouts. For external rotation, the participant was seated, arm in 45° abduction in the neutral plane and ROM was set at minimum arc of 45° for external rotation, commencing from a position of 20° internal rotation to at least 25° of external rotation. Abduction was performed in sitting, with the arm in the neutral plane, and ROM from neutral to as close to 90° as was tolerable for the participant. Three sets of 10 repetitions of each direction were completed with 10 s rest between sets. Additional sets were undertaken if the requisite fatigue level was not reached after completion of the prescribed sets, or testing was ceased if the required fatigue level was reached before the three sets were complete. Testing was also ceased if pain beyond usual resting levels was experienced, however all participants completed at least two sets of each movement direction. Participants were advised to refrain from any further exertion involving their shoulder until the 24 hours measures were taken.
Data were normally distributed. Significance level was set at P=0.05. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to model the changes in the tendon thickness and AHD compared with baseline over the subsequent three time points (1, 6 and 24 hours postexercise). A time by group interaction term was used to compare the change scores between the pain and control groups.