The Clinical Utility of the Seated Wall Angel as a Test with Scoring

The seated wall angel (SWA) is an intervention to improve upper quarter mobility but has not been described as a clinical test with scoring.

To explore the clinical utility of the SWA as a test with scoring. The authors hypothesized that SWA test scores would be lower on the injured than uninjured side, improve over time, and show stronger association with patient-reported shoulder function than shoulder mobility tests.

Prospective cohort.

Patients diagnosed with anterior shoulder instability and referred to physical therapy participated. Testing occurred after physical therapy examination (initial) and six weeks later (follow-up). Rehabilitation was not controlled. Testing included clinical tests (SWA, passive shoulder external rotation range of motion, total arc of motion) and patient-reported outcomes including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, (ASES) and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI). The SWA test was scored 0 to 3 points bilaterally based on number of body contacts with the wall (i.e., elbows and fingertips, posterior fingers, posterior forearm). Passive range of motion was measured with a standard goniometer. SWA scores were compared between sides at initial testing and compared between testing timepoints on the injured side. Associations among injured side clinical test values and patient-reported outcome scores were examined.

Mean (SD) SWA score on the injured side was significantly lower than the uninjured side at initial testing [1.6 (1.0) vs 2.2 (1.1), p = 0.045] and significantly increased at follow-up testing [2.4 (1.0), p = 0.041]. Only SWA test score was significantly correlated with ASES (r=0.597) and WOSI (r=-0.648) scores at initial testing, and SWA test score was significantly correlated with WOSI score at follow-up testing (r=-0.611).

The clinical utility of the SWA test is supported by distinguishing the injured and uninjured sides and having stronger associations with patient-reported shoulder function than shoulder mobility tests.