Validity and reliability of clinical tests for the sacroiliac joint. A review of literature.

Peter Cattley, James Winyard, John Trevaskis, Sharyn Eaton
{"title":"Validity and reliability of clinical tests for the sacroiliac joint. A review of literature.","authors":"Peter Cattley,&nbsp;James Winyard,&nbsp;John Trevaskis,&nbsp;Sharyn Eaton","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) can be a source of low back pain. The complexity of the system involving the SIJ and the varied SIJ pain referral pattern makes it difficult to clinically assess SIJ dysfunction. Despite the emergence of detail of the SIJ complex, the basis of the clinical tests has not been thoroughly investigated.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To review the literature from the last decade dealing with the validity and reliability of clinical tests for SIJ dysfunction in order to determine which tests are reliable and valid.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>For clinical tests with multiple studies, there was agreement on reliability for Gaenslens, Thigh Thrust test, Finger Point test and SIJ Pain Mapping and agreement on validity for Thigh Thrust test. However, Gillets Test, Patrick's FABER and Sacral Thrust/Compression were considered invalid and unreliable, although these results may have been influenced by methodological shortcomings. Examination of the entire SIJ complex may mean that a series of tests are required.</p>","PeriodicalId":93829,"journal":{"name":"Australasian chiropractic & osteopathy : journal of the Chiropractic & Osteopathic College of Australasia","volume":"10 2","pages":"73-80"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2051080/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian chiropractic & osteopathy : journal of the Chiropractic & Osteopathic College of Australasia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) can be a source of low back pain. The complexity of the system involving the SIJ and the varied SIJ pain referral pattern makes it difficult to clinically assess SIJ dysfunction. Despite the emergence of detail of the SIJ complex, the basis of the clinical tests has not been thoroughly investigated.

Objective: To review the literature from the last decade dealing with the validity and reliability of clinical tests for SIJ dysfunction in order to determine which tests are reliable and valid.

Discussion: For clinical tests with multiple studies, there was agreement on reliability for Gaenslens, Thigh Thrust test, Finger Point test and SIJ Pain Mapping and agreement on validity for Thigh Thrust test. However, Gillets Test, Patrick's FABER and Sacral Thrust/Compression were considered invalid and unreliable, although these results may have been influenced by methodological shortcomings. Examination of the entire SIJ complex may mean that a series of tests are required.

骶髂关节临床试验的效度和信度。文献综述。
背景:骶髂关节(SIJ)可能是腰痛的一个来源。涉及SIJ系统的复杂性和不同的SIJ疼痛转诊模式使得临床评估SIJ功能障碍变得困难。尽管出现了SIJ复合体的细节,但临床试验的基础尚未得到彻底的调查。目的:回顾近十年来有关SIJ功能障碍临床试验的效度和信度的文献,以确定哪些试验是可靠和有效的。讨论:对于多研究的临床试验,Gaenslens、Thigh Thrust test、Finger Point test和SIJ Pain Mapping的信度是一致的,而Thigh Thrust test的效度是一致的。然而,Gillets Test、Patrick’s FABER和骶骨推力/压迫被认为无效且不可靠,尽管这些结果可能受到方法学缺陷的影响。对整个SIJ复合体的检查可能意味着需要进行一系列测试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信