Advertisement

Rheumatology International

, Volume 25, Issue 4, pp 260–263 | Cite as

The prevalence of joint hypermobility among high school students

  • Ümit SeçkinEmail author
  • Birkan Sonel Tur
  • Özlem Yılmaz
  • İlker Yağcı
  • Hatice Bodur
  • Tansu Arasıl
Original article

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of joint hypermobility among high school students and to define the characteristics of patients with joint hypermobility.

Methods

The students underwent complete history and physical examination. In order to designate marfanoid habitus, body weight, height, and span/height and upper/lower segment ratios were recorded. The degree of joint hypermobility was scored by the Beighton scoring system. The following features were also examined: arthralgia, myalgia, low back pain, sciatica, spinal deformities, temporomandibular joint pain and crepitus, effusion, swan neck deformity, arachnodactyly, joint dislocation, joint sprain, Raynaud’s phenomenon, stria, varicose veins, abdominal and inguinal hernia, heart disease history, myopia, dropping eyelids, and antimongoloid slant.

Results

Eight hundred sixty-one students (433 females and 428 males) with a mean age of 15.4±1.1 years (range 13–19) were examined. Joint hypermobility was observed in 101 (11.7%) of the students. According to the Beighton scoring system, the majority of these (61.4%) were observed to score 4. Our results show that phenotype has no relation with joint mobility. Of the total number of students, there were 31 male (7.2%) and 70 female (16.2%) hypermobile subjects. The difference between sexes was highly significant (P=0.00005). Joint sprain was detected in 14 of hypermobile students (13.9%) and 50 of nonhypermobile students (6.6%). Its presence was the only significant parameter between hypermobile and nonhypermobile students (P=0.0094).

Conclusions

Joint hypermobility was found in 11.7% of the students in our study, and the results are in harmony with the previous studies on Western populations. Although hypermobility does not seem to be very problematic in young people, as in our focus group, we believe that it is important for physicians to recognize this problem to ensure correct diagnosis and treatment, since it may lead to mimic rheumatic diseases in the future.

Keywords

Beighton scale Joint hypermobility Joint laxity Prevalence 

Notes

Acknowledgement

We thank Dr. Reha Alpar from the Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, for planning this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Grahame R (1990) The hypermobility syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis 49:190–200PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beighton P, Solomon L, Soskolne CL (1973) Articular mobility in an African population. Ann Rheum Dis 32:413–418PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grahame R (1978) Hypermobility in healthy subjects. In: Scott JT (ed) Copeman’s textbook of rheumatic diseases. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, pp 635–637Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Al-Rawl ZS, Al-Aszawi AJ, Al-Chababi T (1985) Joint mobility among university students in Iraq. Br J Rheumatol 24:326–331PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grahame R (2000) The revised (Brighton 1998) criteria for the diagnosis of benign joint hypermobility syndrome (BJHS). J Rheumatol 27:1177–1178Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Biro F, Gewanter HL, Baum J (1983) The hypermobility syndrome. Pediatrics 72:701–706PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gedalia A, Person DA, Brewer EJ Jr, Giannini EH (1985) Hypermobility of the joints in juvenile episodic arthritis/arthralgia. J Pediatr 107:873–876PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nijs J, Van Essche E, De Munck M, Dequeker J (2000) Ultrasonographic, axial, and peripheral measurements in female patients with benign hypermobility syndrome. Calcif Tissue Int 67:37–40CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Resnick D (2002) Additional congenital or heritable anomalies and syndromes. In: Resnick D (ed) Diagnosis of bone and joint disorders. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 4561–4631Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grahame R (1994) Hypermobility syndrome. In: Klippel JH Dieppe PA (eds) Rheumatology. Mosby, London, pp 18.1–6Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bridges AJ, Smith E, Reid J (1992) Joint hypermobility in adults referred to rheumatology clinics. Ann Rheum Dis 51:793–796PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Murray KJ, Woo P (2001) Benign joint hypermobility in childhood. Rheumatology 40:489–491CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Misra MB, Ryan P, Atkinson P, Taylor H, Bell J, Calver D, Fogelman I, Child A, Jackson G, Chambers JB, Grahame R (1996) Extra-articular features of benign joint hypermobility syndrome. Br J Rheumatol 35:861–866Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lewkonina RM, Ansell BM (1983) Articular hypermobility simulating chronic rheumatic disease. Arch Dis Child 58:988–992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nicolas JA (1970) Injuries to knee ligaments: relationship to looseness and tightness in football players. JAMA 212:2236–2239PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ümit Seçkin
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • Birkan Sonel Tur
    • 2
  • Özlem Yılmaz
    • 1
  • İlker Yağcı
    • 1
  • Hatice Bodur
    • 1
  • Tansu Arasıl
    • 2
  1. 1.Clinic of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationNumune Training and Research HospitalAnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationAnkara University School of MedicineAnkaraTurkey
  3. 3.Güvenlik cad. No: 113/5AnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations