IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0061243.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

General Practitioner Management of Shoulder Pain in Comparison with Rheumatologist Expectation of Care and Best Evidence: An Australian National Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Rachelle Buchbinder
  • Margaret P Staples
  • E Michael Shanahan
  • Juliana F Roos

Abstract

Objectives: To determine whether current care for common shoulder problems in Australian general practice is in keeping with rheumatologist expectations and the best available evidence. Methods: We performed a mailed survey of a random sample of 3500 Australian GPs and an online survey of all 270 rheumatologists in Australia in June 2009. Each survey included four vignettes (first presentation of shoulder pain due to rotator cuff tendinopathy, acute rotator cuff tear in a 45 year-old labourer and early and later presentation of adhesive capsulitis). For each vignette, GPs were asked to indicate their management, rheumatologists were asked to indicate appropriate primary care, and we determined best available evidence from relevant Cochrane and other systematic reviews and published guidelines. Results: Data were available for at least one vignette for 614/3500 (17.5%) GPs and 64 (23.8%) rheumatologists. For first presentation of rotator cuff tendinopathy, 69% and 82% of GPs and 50% and 56% rheumatologists would order a shoulder X-ray and ultrasound respectively (between group comparisons P = 0.004 and P

Suggested Citation

  • Rachelle Buchbinder & Margaret P Staples & E Michael Shanahan & Juliana F Roos, 2013. "General Practitioner Management of Shoulder Pain in Comparison with Rheumatologist Expectation of Care and Best Evidence: An Australian National Survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(4), pages 1-12, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0061243
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061243
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0061243
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0061243&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0061243?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0061243. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.