Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

Primer: history and examination in the assessment of musculoskeletal problems

Nature Clinical Practice Rheumatology volume 4, pages 26–33 (2008)Cite this article

Abstract

Musculoskeletal problems are very common, and clinical assessment is central to their appropriate management; however, many clinicians are not sufficiently competent to carry out this assessment. A standardized approach to the clinical assessment of a musculoskeletal problem is, therefore, necessary, whether the patient is presenting to primary care, rheumatology or orthopedics. Such a standardized approach gives a benchmark for this competency and can also be used as a teaching aid. As doctors become increasingly competent in clinical assessment and reach into training programs within musculoskeletal specialities, more detailed information will be required from the medical history of the patient, in addition to the use of special tests on clinical examination. These clinical skills need to be taught and also assessed.

Key Points

  • Assessment of the musculoskeletal system should be as thorough as that of other organ systems

  • Assessment of the musculoskeletal system needs to be systematic and sequential; look, feel and move—active and passive

  • Clinical examination of the musculoskeletal system involves many specific tests, but only a limited number needs to be mastered (except by a specialist)

  • A rapid screening assessment should be included in all standard clinical examinations of any patient

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Woolf AD and Pfleger B (2003) Burden of major musculoskeletal conditions. Bull World Health Organ 81: 646–656

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Woolf AD et al. (2004) Global core recommendations for a musculoskeletal undergraduate curriculum. Ann Rheum Dis 63: 517–524

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Woolf AD (2007) What healthcare services do people with musculoskeletal conditions need? The role of rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis 66: 281–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Wadey VM et al. (2007) Canadian multidisciplinary core curriculum for musculoskeletal health. J Rheumatol 34: 567–580

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. European Action Towards Better Musculoskeletal Health (2004) [http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_projects/2000/promotion/ fp_promotion_2000_exs_15_en.pdf] (accessed 17 October 2007)

  6. Ahern MJ et al. (1991) The musculo-skeletal examination: a neglected clinical skill. Aust N Z J Med 21: 303–306

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Doherty DA et al. (2001) Lifetime and five-year age-specific risks of first and subsequent osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 12: 16–23

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Freedman KB and Bernstein J (1998) The adequacy of medical school education in musculoskeletal medicine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80: 1421–1427

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lynch JR (2006) Important demographic variables impact the musculoskeletal knowledge and confidence of academic primary care physicians. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88: 1589–1595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Woolf AD et al. (2004) Musculoskeletal pain in Europe: its impact and a comparison of population and medical perceptions of treatment in eight European countries. Ann Rheum Dis 63: 342–347

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Åkesson K et al. (2003) Improved education in musculoskeletal conditions is necessary for all doctors. Bull World Health Organ 81: 677–683

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Coady DA et al. (2004) Teaching medical students musculoskeletal examination skills: identifying barriers to learning and ways of overcoming them. Scand J Rheumatol 33: 47–51

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (2005) CanMEDS 2005 Framework [http://meds.queensu.ca/medicine/obgyn/pdf/CanMEDS_2005_Framework.pdf] (accessed 17 October 2007)

  14. van der Heijde DM (1993) Development of a disease activity score based on judgment in clinical practice by rheumatologists. J Rheumatol 20: 579–581

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Bellamy N et al. (1997) Validation study of a computerized version of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities VA3.0 Osteoarthritis Index. J Rheumatol 24: 2413–2415

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. World Health Organization (2001) The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization

  17. Doherty M et al. (1992) The 'GALS' locomotor screen. Ann Rheum Dis 51: 1165–1169

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Saleh K et al. (2004) Development and evaluation of an integrated musculoskeletal disease course for medical students. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A: 1653–1658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Badcock LJ et al. (2006) Meeting the needs of increasing numbers of medical students—a best practice approach. Rheumatology (Oxford) 45: 799–803

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Bideau M et al. (2006) Benefits of a programme taking advantage of patient-instructors to teach and assess musculoskeletal skills in medical students. Ann Rheum Dis 65: 1626–1630

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hendry GD et al. (1999) Patients teach students: partners in arthritis education. Med Educ 33: 674–677

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Smith MD et al. (2000) Evaluation of patient partners in the teaching of the musculoskeletal examination. J Rheumatol 27: 1533–1537

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Woolf AD et al. (2006) Improving patient care by involving people with arthritis as educators of primary care physicians: the revised Patient Partner Programme. Ann Rheum Dis 65 (Suppl 2): 620

    Google Scholar 

  24. Biggs J (2003) Teaching for Quality Learning at University: what the student does (Society for Research into Higher Education), edn 2. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. AD Woolf is a Consultant Rheumatologist at the Royal Cornwall Hospital and Professor of Rheumatology at the Peninsula Medical School, Truro, UK.,

    Anthony D Woolf

  2. K Åkesson is a Professor of Orthopedics and a Consultant in the Department of Orthopedics, Malmö University Hospital, Lund University, Sweden.,

    Kristina Åkesson

Authors
  1. Anthony D Woolf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kristina Åkesson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anthony D Woolf.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Woolf, A., Åkesson, K. Primer: history and examination in the assessment of musculoskeletal problems. Nat Rev Rheumatol 4, 26–33 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncprheum0673

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncprheum0673

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing