What is the sensitivity of the Roos (Elevated Arm Stress) test for diagnosing thoracic outlet syndrome?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: February 12, 2026View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Sensitivity of the Roos Test for Thoracic Outlet Syndrome

The Roos test has poor sensitivity (approximately 62-67%) and should not be used as a standalone diagnostic test for thoracic outlet syndrome, with evidence suggesting its use should be discontinued for differential diagnosis of TOS. 1

Test Performance Characteristics

Sensitivity and Specificity Data

  • The Roos test demonstrates 62% sensitivity and 66% specificity when symptoms occurring during the test are used as the endpoint 2

  • When ultrasound-confirmed TOS is used as the diagnostic endpoint, sensitivity improves slightly to 67% with 78% specificity using a cutoff of -15 mmHg oxygen pressure drop 2

  • A 2017 systematic review concluded that Grade C evidence exists recommending discontinuation of the Roos test for differential diagnosis of thoracic outlet syndrome due to inadequate diagnostic accuracy 1

Comparison to Other Provocative Tests

  • The Roos test performs worse than other provocative maneuvers including the Adson test (PPV 85%), hyperabduction test (PPV 92%), and Wright test 3

  • Provocative tests in general have mean sensitivity of 72% and specificity of 53%, with the Roos test falling below these averages 3

  • Using multiple provocative tests in combination improves specificity more effectively than relying on the Roos test alone 3

Clinical Implications and Pitfalls

Test Reliability Issues

  • The Roos maneuver demonstrates good but imperfect test-retest reliability, partly due to inherent unreliability of the provocation maneuver itself 2

  • Symptoms reported by history differ from symptoms expressed during the Roos maneuver in one-third of patients, highlighting the test's inconsistency 2

  • The Roos test should probably be performed at least twice in patients with suspected TOS to improve reliability 2

Diagnostic Approach

  • The American College of Radiology recommends chest radiography as initial imaging to identify osseous abnormalities such as cervical ribs or first rib anomalies 4

  • For neurogenic TOS, MRI without IV contrast is sufficient to diagnose compression of neurovascular bundles 4

  • Doppler ultrasonography is excellent for initial evaluation of venous TOS, showing venous compression during arm abduction 4

  • Imaging findings must be carefully correlated with clinical symptoms, as venous compression is often present with arm abduction in asymptomatic patients 5

Key Caveat

  • The Roos test does not allow for exclusive differential diagnosis of TOS and may provoke symptoms in patients with other upper extremity pathology 1

  • Better diagnostic accuracy is achieved with the Halstead maneuver, Wright's test, Cyriax Release test, and supraclavicular pressure test, though these also do not exclusively diagnose TOS 1

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.