Article Text

Download PDFPDF

141 Terminology and diagnostic criteria used in clinical studies investigating subacromial impingement syndrome: a scoping review
  1. Adam Witten1,
  2. Karen Mikkelsen1,
  3. Thomas Mayntzhusen1,
  4. Mikkel Clausen1,2,
  5. Kristian Thorborg1,
  6. Per Hölmich1,
  7. Kristoffer Barfod1
  1. 1Sports Orthopedic Research Center – Copenhagen, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Denmark, Denmark
  2. 2Department of Midwifery, Physiotherapy, Occupational Therapy and Psychomotor Therapy, Faculty of Health, University College Copenhagen, Denmark


Introduction Lack of consensus regarding terminology and diagnostic criteria used to describe and identify patients with subacromial impingement syndrome (SIS) could be an important driver of misconceptions and misinterpretations of scientific results in this population. We aim to map the literature regarding terminology and diagnostic criteria used in clinical studies investigating SIS.

Materials and Methods PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus were searched from inception to June 2020 using known terms for SIS. Peer-reviewed clinical studies investigating SIS were eligible for inclusion. Studies containing secondary analyses of a previously published study, reviews, pilot studies and studies with less than ten participants were excluded. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, three reviewers independently applied inclusion and exclusion criteria to full-text versions of the articles and one reviewer extracted data. Disagreement between the reviewers was resolved through dialogue.

Results 11.056 records were identified. 911 were retrieved for full-text screening. 535 were included. 20 different terms for SIS were identified. The diagnostic criteria were generally based on a cluster of pain provocative shoulder tests. 134 different diagnostic criteria were identified. 30% of the studies used a combination of clinical tests and imaging. 9% of the studies specified that they included patients with full-thickness supraspinatus tears and 46% specified that they did not.

Conclusion There is a worrying lack of consensus regarding terminology and diagnostic criteria for SIS. This calls for careful consideration when interpreting the results of studies investigating SIS and when comparing studies.

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.