University of Leicester
Browse

Diagnostic domains, differential diagnosis and conditions requiring further medical attention that are considered important in the assessment for Achilles tendinopathy: a Delphi consensus study

journal contribution
posted on 2025-06-03, 10:45 authored by Peter Malliaras, Karin Gravare Silbernagel, Robert-Jan de Vos, Jaryd Bourke, Igor Sancho, Shawn L Hanlon, Anne-Sofie Agergaard, Roald Bahr, Natália Franco Netto Bittencourt, Marcelo Bordalo, Annelie Brorsson, Victoria Tzortziou Brown, Tanusha Cardoso, Sally Child, Ruth L Chimenti, Emma Cowley, Pieter D’Hooghe, Wayne Derman, Jonathan T Finnoff, Siu Ngor Fu, Jill Halstead, Bruce Hamilton, Katarina Maria Nilsson-Helander, Per Hölmich, Jonathan Houghton, Alicia M James, Kornelia Kulig, Amanda Lau, Samuel Ling, Nicola Maffulli, Lorenzo Masci, Sue Mayes, Sean Mc Auliffe, Carol McCrum, Dylan Morrissey, Shannon E Munteanu, Myles Calder Murphy, Richard Newsham-West, Seth O’Neill, Nat Padhiar, Theodora Papadopoulou, Jonathan D Rees, Ebonie Kendra Rio, Diego Ruffino, Alex Scott, Suzy Speirs, Yang Sun, Kristian Thorborg, Larissa Trease, Jan AN Verhaar, Evi Wezenbeek, Sue White, Jennifer A Zellers, S Zhang, Vasileios Korakakis, Bill Vicenzino
The absence of agreed methods to diagnose Achilles tendinopathy impedes research and clinical practice. This gap results in heterogeneous and/or poorly described study samples, making it challenging to apply findings in clinical practice. The aim of this Delphi study was to define consensus on (1) diagnostic domains; (2) differential diagnoses; and (3) conditions requiring further medical attention, when assessing for Achilles tendinopathy.We conducted a sequential three-stage process which included: (1) identifying diagnostic domains, differential diagnoses and conditions requiring further medical attention based on existing scoping reviews and clinical practice guidelines; (2) developing Delphi survey questions; and (3) administering a five-round Delphi online survey. Consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement.52 participants completed the surveys. Four diagnostic domains were deemed essential and reached consensus (pain location (93%); pain during activity (97%); tests that provoke pain (87%); palpation to assess pain (83%)). 15 differential diagnoses reached consensus: 2 for both midportion and insertional (partial tear (80%); posterior ankle impingement (78%)), 6 for midportion (plantaris tendinopathy (84%); tibialis posterior or flexor hallucis longus tendinopathy/tenosynovitis (72%); flexor digitorum longus tendinopathy (77%); accessory soleus muscle (74%); paratendinopathy (86%); sural nerve neuropathy (81%)) and 7 for insertional (superficial (88%) and retrocalcaneal bursitis (86%); Haglund’s/calcaneal exostosis (80%), intratendinous calcifications (73%); Sever’s disease (78%); calcaneal stress reaction/fracture (80%); subtalar/ankle pain (71%)). Six conditions requiring further medical attention reached consensus: (Achilles tendon rupture (83%); systemic inflammatory joint disease (86%); metabolic syndrome (75%); familial hypercholesterolaemia (77%); endocrine and hormonal disorders (80%); drug reactions (77%)).This consensus identified essential diagnostic domains, differential diagnoses and conditions requiring further medical attention that should be considered when assessing for Achilles tendinopathy.

History

Author affiliation

College of Life Sciences Healthcare

Version

  • VoR (Version of Record)

Published in

British Journal of Sports Medicine

Pagination

bjsports-2024-109185

Publisher

BMJ

issn

0306-3674

eissn

1473-0480

Copyright date

2025

Notes

Embargo on VOR - AAM requested from author

Spatial coverage

England

Language

en

Deposited by

Dr Seth O'Neill

Deposit date

2025-05-12

Usage metrics

    University of Leicester Publications

    Licence

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC