Skip to main content
International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy logoLink to International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy
. 2023 Feb 2;18(1):68139. doi: 10.26603/001c.68139

EDITORIAL: MSK Ultrasound and Introduction of IJSPT Ultrasound Bites Feature

Robert C Manske 1,, Phil Page 2, Michael Voight 3, Chris Wolfe 3
PMCID: PMC9897035  PMID: 36793580

Point of care ultrasound (POCUS), musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSK-US), and rehabilitation ultrasound imaging (RUSI) are similar procedures that use a non-ionizing imaging and is becoming more inexpensive, portable, safe, and able to be used quickly.1–4 These modalities are commonly used in various medical disciplines to assess musculoskeletal tissues (bones, muscles, tendons, ligaments, nerves) as well as structures such as the heart, lungs, and bladder just to name a few. MSK-US primarily focuses on the structural integrity or characteristics of the neuromuscular system. This would include viewing soft tissues for assessment of normalcy or abnormality. For example, viewing the supraspinatus for signs of swelling or a rotator cuff tear, or assessing the median nerve to measure swelling or size differences in those with carpal tunnel syndrome are commonly performed using MSK-US. RUSI is similar but includes the evaluation of muscle and soft tissue during exercise or movement dynamically including its use for biofeedback.5,6 An example of RUSI include real-time observation of spinal muscle (lumbar multifidus and transverse abdominus) activation patterns during exercise to facilitate improved neuromotor control.6

The use of MSK-US in clinical practice has nearly quadrupled since the early 2000’s, mainly due to its use with non-radiologists.3,7,8 Its surge in popularity parallels research suggesting that MSK-US is accurate and cost effective, with patients reporting greater satisfaction with MSK-US compared to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).9–11

Introducing Ultrasound Bites

Ultrasound is becoming more widely recognized in rehabilitation as a valuable tool to objectively assess musculoskeletal structures and guide rehabilitation.6,12 The appropriate use of imaging is essential in all healthcare professions for accurate patient diagnosis and management as well as optimizing the use of healthcare resources.13 It should also be stressed that mistakes made by inadequately trained operators could jeopardize a patients’ wellbeing by delaying treatment for life threatening conditions.14 Because of this, the International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy (IJSPT) thought it important to educate readership with common tips to view various musculoskeletal structures. Starting with the long head of biceps tendon in our last issue,15 subsequent issues of IJSPT will include a section entitled “MSK Ultrasound Bites: Tips and Tricks”. Each month, a new structure that can be assessed with MSK-US will be thoroughly described, including normal and pathological structure findings with clear and concise guidelines describing probe placement and findings. As can be seen in a corresponding study in this issue, many therapists are utilizing MSK-US clinically.16 In addition, our clinical commentary this month provides an overview and introduction to the clinical use of MSK-US for rehabilitation, diagnosis, interventions and research. We believe that its use will continue to evolve as physical therapists become more adept at using this skill to propagate care beyond the traditional examination.16

References

  1. Guidelines for musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology. Backhaus M, Burmester G, Gerber T, Grassi W, Machold K, Swen W, et al. Jul 1;2001 Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 60(7):641–649. doi: 10.1136/ard.60.7.641. doi: 10.1136/ard.60.7.641. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Jacobson Jon A. Seminars in Musculoskeletal Radiology. 02. Vol. 9. Georg Thieme Verlag KG; New York: Musculoskeletal ultrasound and MRI: Which do I choose? pp. 135–149. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Klauser Andrea S., Tagliafico Alberto, Allen Gina M., Boutry Natalie, Campbell Rob, Court-Payen Michel, Grainger Andrew, Guerini Henry, McNally Eugene, O’Connor Philip J., Ostlere Simon, Petroons Philippe, Reijnierse Monique, Sconfienza Luca Maria, Silvestri Enzo, Wilson David J., Martinoli Carlo. European Radiology. 5. Vol. 22. Springer Science and Business Media LLC; Clinical indications for musculoskeletal ultrasound: A Delphi-Based consensus paper of the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology; pp. 1140–1148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. The top 10 reasons musculoskeletal sonography is an important complementary or alternative technique to MRI. Nazarian Levon N. Jun;2008 American Journal of Roentgenology. 190(6):1621–1626. doi: 10.2214/ajr.07.3385. doi: 10.2214/ajr.07.3385. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Rehabilitative ultrasound imaging is a valid measure of trunk muscle size and activation during most isometric sub-maximal contractions: A systematic review. Koppenhaver Shane L., Hebert Jeffrey J., Parent Eric C., Fritz Julie M. 2009Australian Journal of Physiotherapy. 55(3):153–169. doi: 10.1016/s0004-9514(09)70076-5. doi: 10.1016/s0004-9514(09)70076-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Whittaker Jackie L., Teyhen Deydre S., Elliott James M., Cook Katy, Langevin Helene M., Dahl Haldis H., Stokes Maria. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy. 8. Vol. 37. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy (JOSPT); Rehabilitative ultrasound imaging: understanding the technology and its applications; pp. 434–449. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Comparative trends in utilization of MRI and ultrasound to evaluate nonspine joint disease 2003-2015. Kanesa-Thasan Riti M., Nazarian Levon N., Parker Laurence, Rao Vijay, Levin David C. Mar;2018 Journal of the American College of Radiology. 15(3 pt A):402–407. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.10.015. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.10.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Dramatically increased musculoskeletal ultrasound utilization from 2000-2009, especially by podiatrists in private offices. Sharpe Richard E., Nazarian Levon N., Parker Laurence, Rao Vijay M., Levin David C. Feb;2012 Journal of the American College of Radiology. 9(2):141–146. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2011.09.008. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2011.09.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Roy Jean-Sébastien, Braën Caroline, Leblond Jean, Desmeules François, Dionne Clermont E, MacDermid Joy C, Bureau Nathalie J, Frémont Pierre. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 20. Vol. 49. BMJ; Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography, MRI and MR arthrography in the characterisation of rotator cuff disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis; pp. 1316–1328. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Musculoskeletal imaging: Medicare use, costs, and potential for cost substitution. Parker Laurence, Nazarian Levon N., Carrino John A., Morrison William B., Grimaldi Gregory, Frangos Andrea J., Levin David C., Rao Vijay M. Mar;2008 Journal of the American College of Radiology. 5(3):182–188. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2007.07.016. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2007.07.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Sonography and MRI of the shoulder: comparison of patient satisfaction. Middleton William D., Payne William T., Teefey Sharlene A., Hildebolt Charles F., Rubin David A., Yamaguchi Ken. Nov;2004 American Journal of Roentgenology. 183(5):1449–1452. doi: 10.2214/ajr.183.5.1831449. doi: 10.2214/ajr.183.5.1831449. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Skeletal muscle ultrasound. Pillen Sigrid, van Alfen Nens. Dec;2011 Neurological Research. 33(10):1016–1024. doi: 10.1179/1743132811y.0000000010. doi: 10.1179/1743132811y.0000000010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. The accuracy of diagnostic ultrasound imaging for musculoskeletal soft tissue pathology of the extremities: a comprehensive review of the literature. Henderson Rogan E A, Walker Bruce F., Young Kenneth J. Nov 5;2015 Chiropractic & Manual Therapies. 23(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s12998-015-0076-5. doi: 10.1186/s12998-015-0076-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Let’s all jump on the ultrasound bandwagon. Edwards Hazel. Feb;2010 Ultrasound. 18(1):4–7. doi: 10.1258/ult.2009.009003. doi: 10.1258/ult.2009.009003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Long Head of the Biceps Tendon (LHBT) Manske Robert C, Voight Michael, Wolfe Chris, Page Phil. Dec 2;2022 International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy. 17(7) doi: 10.26603/001c.55786. doi: 10.26603/001c.55786. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Physical therapist use of diagnostic ultrasound imaging in clinical practice: A review of case reports. Manske R.C., Podoll K.R., Markowski A., Watkins M., Hayward L.M., Maitland M.E. 2023Int J Sports Phys Ther. doi: 10.26603/001c.68137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Articles from International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy are provided here courtesy of North American Sports Medicine Institute

RESOURCES