[杠杆标志试验在疑似膝关节韧带和/或半月板损伤中的信度和效度:骨科医生和物理治疗师的比较]。

IF 0.6 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Sportverletzung-Sportschaden Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-04 DOI:10.1055/a-2153-1550
David Cavelti, Holger Grehn, Hannu Luomajoki
{"title":"[杠杆标志试验在疑似膝关节韧带和/或半月板损伤中的信度和效度:骨科医生和物理治疗师的比较]。","authors":"David Cavelti, Holger Grehn, Hannu Luomajoki","doi":"10.1055/a-2153-1550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The purpose of this study was to investigate the intertester reliability and validity of the Lever Sign Test. Intertester reliability has received little attention in previous studies. In order to make comparisons with other studies, the intertester reliability and validity of the Lachman and Anterior Drawer Tests were also calculated.</p><p><strong>Patients/material and methods: </strong>Patients between 18 and 50 years of age with suspected ligament and/or meniscus injuries were included. Exclusion criteria were suspected malignant, systemic, or central neurologic disease, acute cartilage injury, suspected fracture, or knowledge of the participant's knee findings. Testing was randomized and blinded by an experienced orthopaedic surgeon and a physical therapist. Cohen's kappa was calculated for intertester reliability. Sensitivity and specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and positive and negative likelihood ratio were calculated. MRI findings were used as the gold standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-six patients were enrolled in the study, 27 male (75%) and 9 female (25%). The prevalence of anterior cruciate ligament lesions was 44.4%. Cohen's kappa (κ) was κ=0.6 (CI 95% [0.29, 0.91]) for the Lever Sign Test, κ=0.64 (CI 95% [0.35, 0.93]) for the Lachman test, and κ=0.63 (CI 95% [0.3, 0.95]) for the Anterior Drawer Test. The sensitivity of the Lever Sign Test was 0.53 and 0.40 for the orthopaedic surgeon and physical therapist, respectively, specificity was 0.89 and 0.79, the positive predictive value was 0.80 and 0.60, the negative predictive value was 0.70 and 0.62, the positive likelihood ratio was 4.80 and 1.90, respectively, and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.76 and 0.53.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The estimated intertester reliability of the Lever Sign Test was good. The Lever Sign Test is suitable as a complement to the Lachman Test, which is considered the most valid test in the literature. The weaknesses and ambiguities of the operating mechanism of the Lever Sign Test should not be ignored and should be further explored.</p>","PeriodicalId":51169,"journal":{"name":"Sportverletzung-Sportschaden","volume":"37 4","pages":"187-195"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Reliability and validity of the Lever Sign Test in suspected ligament and/or meniscus injuries of the knee: a comparison between an orthopaedist and a physical therapist].\",\"authors\":\"David Cavelti, Holger Grehn, Hannu Luomajoki\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2153-1550\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The purpose of this study was to investigate the intertester reliability and validity of the Lever Sign Test. Intertester reliability has received little attention in previous studies. In order to make comparisons with other studies, the intertester reliability and validity of the Lachman and Anterior Drawer Tests were also calculated.</p><p><strong>Patients/material and methods: </strong>Patients between 18 and 50 years of age with suspected ligament and/or meniscus injuries were included. Exclusion criteria were suspected malignant, systemic, or central neurologic disease, acute cartilage injury, suspected fracture, or knowledge of the participant's knee findings. Testing was randomized and blinded by an experienced orthopaedic surgeon and a physical therapist. Cohen's kappa was calculated for intertester reliability. Sensitivity and specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and positive and negative likelihood ratio were calculated. MRI findings were used as the gold standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-six patients were enrolled in the study, 27 male (75%) and 9 female (25%). The prevalence of anterior cruciate ligament lesions was 44.4%. Cohen's kappa (κ) was κ=0.6 (CI 95% [0.29, 0.91]) for the Lever Sign Test, κ=0.64 (CI 95% [0.35, 0.93]) for the Lachman test, and κ=0.63 (CI 95% [0.3, 0.95]) for the Anterior Drawer Test. The sensitivity of the Lever Sign Test was 0.53 and 0.40 for the orthopaedic surgeon and physical therapist, respectively, specificity was 0.89 and 0.79, the positive predictive value was 0.80 and 0.60, the negative predictive value was 0.70 and 0.62, the positive likelihood ratio was 4.80 and 1.90, respectively, and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.76 and 0.53.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The estimated intertester reliability of the Lever Sign Test was good. The Lever Sign Test is suitable as a complement to the Lachman Test, which is considered the most valid test in the literature. The weaknesses and ambiguities of the operating mechanism of the Lever Sign Test should not be ignored and should be further explored.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51169,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sportverletzung-Sportschaden\",\"volume\":\"37 4\",\"pages\":\"187-195\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sportverletzung-Sportschaden\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2153-1550\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sportverletzung-Sportschaden","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2153-1550","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

前言:本研究的目的是探讨杠杆符号测验的信度和效度。在以往的研究中,测试者间信度很少受到重视。为了与其他研究进行比较,还计算了Lachman检验和前抽屉检验的测试者间信度和效度。患者/材料和方法:年龄在18至50岁之间,疑似韧带和/或半月板损伤的患者被纳入研究。排除标准为疑似恶性、全身性或中枢神经疾病、急性软骨损伤、疑似骨折或了解参与者的膝关节检查结果。试验由一位经验丰富的骨科医生和一位物理治疗师随机和盲法进行。计算测试者间信度的Cohen’s kappa。计算敏感性与特异性、阳性与阴性预测值、阳性与阴性似然比。MRI结果作为金标准。结果:36例患者入组,其中男性27例(75%),女性9例(25%)。前交叉韧带病变发生率为44.4%。杠杆符号检验的Cohen’s kappa (κ)为κ=0.6 (CI 95% [0.29, 0.91]), Lachman检验的κ=0.64 (CI 95%[0.35, 0.93]),前抽屉检验的κ=0.63 (CI 95%[0.3, 0.95])。杠杆标志试验对骨科医生和物理治疗师的敏感性分别为0.53和0.40,特异性分别为0.89和0.79,阳性预测值分别为0.80和0.60,阴性预测值分别为0.70和0.62,阳性似然比分别为4.80和1.90,阴性似然比分别为0.76和0.53。结论:杠杆符号测验的被测者间信度较好。杠杆符号测试适合作为补充拉赫曼测试,这被认为是文献中最有效的测试。杠杆标志测试运行机制的不足和不明确之处不容忽视,值得进一步探讨。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[Reliability and validity of the Lever Sign Test in suspected ligament and/or meniscus injuries of the knee: a comparison between an orthopaedist and a physical therapist].

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to investigate the intertester reliability and validity of the Lever Sign Test. Intertester reliability has received little attention in previous studies. In order to make comparisons with other studies, the intertester reliability and validity of the Lachman and Anterior Drawer Tests were also calculated.

Patients/material and methods: Patients between 18 and 50 years of age with suspected ligament and/or meniscus injuries were included. Exclusion criteria were suspected malignant, systemic, or central neurologic disease, acute cartilage injury, suspected fracture, or knowledge of the participant's knee findings. Testing was randomized and blinded by an experienced orthopaedic surgeon and a physical therapist. Cohen's kappa was calculated for intertester reliability. Sensitivity and specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and positive and negative likelihood ratio were calculated. MRI findings were used as the gold standard.

Results: Thirty-six patients were enrolled in the study, 27 male (75%) and 9 female (25%). The prevalence of anterior cruciate ligament lesions was 44.4%. Cohen's kappa (κ) was κ=0.6 (CI 95% [0.29, 0.91]) for the Lever Sign Test, κ=0.64 (CI 95% [0.35, 0.93]) for the Lachman test, and κ=0.63 (CI 95% [0.3, 0.95]) for the Anterior Drawer Test. The sensitivity of the Lever Sign Test was 0.53 and 0.40 for the orthopaedic surgeon and physical therapist, respectively, specificity was 0.89 and 0.79, the positive predictive value was 0.80 and 0.60, the negative predictive value was 0.70 and 0.62, the positive likelihood ratio was 4.80 and 1.90, respectively, and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.76 and 0.53.

Conclusion: The estimated intertester reliability of the Lever Sign Test was good. The Lever Sign Test is suitable as a complement to the Lachman Test, which is considered the most valid test in the literature. The weaknesses and ambiguities of the operating mechanism of the Lever Sign Test should not be ignored and should be further explored.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sportverletzung-Sportschaden
Sportverletzung-Sportschaden 医学-运动科学
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ihr Forum - Die Zeitschrift Sportverletzung-Sportschaden Infos von A bis Z: Grundlagen, Prävention und Rehabilitation Topaktuelle Themen: Abbildung der Verletzungen/Prävention bei Trendsportarten Vielfältiges Spektrum: Physiotherapie, Wissenschaft und angewandte Forschung, neue Produkte und Hilfsmittel Aktuelle Themen mit echtem Nutzwert Sporttraumatologie: Prävention, Therapie, Rehabilitation Sportphysiotherapie: Grundlagen, Biomechanik, Manuelle Therapie, Funktionelle Therapie, Trainingstherapie im Sport, Geräte, Trends
×
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