Literature DB >> 20970757

Reliability and agreement of hip range of motion and provocative physical examination tests in asymptomatic volunteers.

Heidi Prather1, Marcie Harris-Hayes, Devyani M Hunt, Karen Steger-May, Vinta Mathew, John C Clohisy.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To: (1) report passive hip range of motion (ROM) in asymptomatic young adults, (2) report the intratester and intertester reliability of hip ROM measurements among testers of multiple disciplines, and (3) report the results of provocative hip tests and tester agreement.
DESIGN: Descriptive epidemiology study.
SETTING: Tertiary university. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-eight young adult volunteers without musculoskeletal symptoms, history of disorder, or surgery involving the lumbar spine or lower extremities were enrolled and completed the study.
METHODS: Asymptomatic young adult volunteers completed questionnaires and were examined by 2 blinded examiners during a single session. The testers were physical therapists and physicians. Hip ROM and provocative tests were completed by both examiners on each hip. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Inter-rater and intrarater reliability for ROM and agreement for provocative tests were determined.
RESULTS: Twenty-eight asymptomatic adults, mean age 31 years (range, 18-51 years), with a mean modified Harris Hip Score of 99.5 ± 1.5 and UCLA activity score of 8.8 ± 1.2 completed the study. Intrarater agreement was excellent for all hip ROM measurements, with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) ranging from 0.76 to 0.97, with similar agreement if the examiner was a physical therapist or a physician. Excellent inter-rater reliability was found for hip flexion ICC 0.87 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.78-0.92), supine internal rotation ICC 0.75 (95% CI 0.60-0.84), and prone internal rotation ICC 0.79 (95% CI 0.66-0.87). The least reliable measurements were supine hip abduction (ICC 0.34) and supine external rotation (ICC 0.18). Agreement between examiners ranged from 96% to 100% for provocative hip tests, which included the hip impingement, resisted straight leg raise, Flexion Abduction External Rotation/Patrick, and log roll tests.
CONCLUSIONS: Specific hip ROM measures show excellent inter-rater reliability, and provocative hip tests show good agreement among multiple examiners and medical disciplines. Further studies are needed to assess the use of these measurements and tests as a part of a hip screening examination to assess for young adults at risk for intra-articular hip disorders before the onset of degenerative changes.
Copyright © 2010 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20970757      PMCID: PMC3438506          DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2010.05.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PM R        ISSN: 1934-1482            Impact factor:   2.298


  38 in total

Review 1.  Current concepts in the management of femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  J R Crawford; R N Villar
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2005-11

2.  Range of motion in anterior femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  M Kubiak-Langer; Moritz Tannast; S B Murphy; K A Siebenrock; F Langlotz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  The measurement of joint motion; the technic of goniometry.

Authors:  M L MOORE
Journal:  Phys Ther Rev       Date:  1949-06

4.  Treatment of femoro-acetabular impingement with surgical dislocation and débridement in young adults.

Authors:  Christopher L Peters; Jill A Erickson
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 5.  Preliminary assessment and treatment guidelines for hip disorders in young adults.

Authors:  John C Clohisy; James A Keeney; Perry L Schoenecker
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 6.  Hip pain from impingement and dysplasia in patients aged 20-50 years. Workup and role for reconstruction.

Authors:  Frantz Langlais; Jean-Christophe Lambotte; Ronan Lannou; Jean-Emmanuel Gédouin; Nicolas Belot; Hervé Thomazeau; Jean-Michel Frieh; François Gouin; Christophe Hulet; Franck Marin; Henri Migaud; Hassan Sadri; Claude Vielpeau; Dominique Richter
Journal:  Joint Bone Spine       Date:  2006-10-25       Impact factor: 4.929

7.  Correlation between internal rotation and bony anatomy in the hip.

Authors:  Tobias F Wyss; John M Clark; Dominik Weishaupt; Hubert P Nötzli
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Histopathologic features of the acetabular labrum in femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  Keita Ito; Michael Leunig; Reinhold Ganz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Effect of passive stretch on reproducibility of hip range of motion measurements.

Authors:  Timo J Aalto; Olavi Airaksinen; Tuomas M Härkönen; Jari P Arokoski
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 3.966

10.  Does stabilization of the tibiofemoral joint affect passive prone hip rotation range of motion measures in unimpaired individuals? A preliminary report.

Authors:  Marcie Harris-Hayes; Pamela M Wendl; Shirley A Sahrmann; Linda R Van Dillen
Journal:  Physiother Theory Pract       Date:  2007 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.279

View more
  36 in total

1.  Does surgical hip dislocation and periacetabular osteotomy improve pain in patients with Perthes-like deformities and acetabular dysplasia?

Authors:  John C Clohisy; Jeffrey J Nepple; James R Ross; Gail Pashos; Perry L Schoenecker
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Are there sex-dependent differences in acetabular dysplasia characteristics?

Authors:  Stephen T Duncan; Ljiljana Bogunovic; Geneva Baca; Perry L Schoenecker; John C Clohisy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-01-31       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Microinstability of the hip: a previously unrecognized pathology.

Authors:  Ioanna Bolia; Jorge Chahla; Renato Locks; Karen Briggs; Marc J Philippon
Journal:  Muscles Ligaments Tendons J       Date:  2016-12-21

4.  Risk Factors for Long-term Hip Osteoarthritis in Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Without Surgical Intervention.

Authors:  Heath P Melugin; Rena F Hale; Jun Zhou; Matthew LaPrade; Christopher Bernard; Devin Leland; Bruce A Levy; Aaron J Krych
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2020-08-21       Impact factor: 6.202

5.  Can femoroacetabular impingement and hip dysplasia be distinguished by clinical presentation and patient history?

Authors:  Thomas Kappe; Tugrul Kocak; Heiko Reichel; Christian R Fraitzl
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-06-07       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Is a positive femoroacetabular impingement test a common finding in healthy young adults?

Authors:  Lene B Laborie; Trude G Lehmann; Ingvild Ø Engesæter; Lars B Engesæter; Karen Rosendahl
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-02-15       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Abnormal hip physical examination findings in asymptomatic female soccer athletes.

Authors:  Heidi Prather; Devyani Hunt; Monica Rho; Ted Yemm; Kathryn Fong; Robert H Brophy
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-10-23       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  Relative femoral neck lengthening improves pain and hip function in proximal femoral deformities with a high-riding trochanter.

Authors:  Christoph E Albers; Simon D Steppacher; Joseph M Schwab; Moritz Tannast; Klaus A Siebenrock
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Physical Examination of the Hip.

Authors:  Daniel Wichman; Jonathan P Rasio; Austin Looney; Shane J Nho
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2020-11-20       Impact factor: 3.843

10.  Anxiety and Insomnia in Young and Middle-Aged Adult Hip Pain Patients With and Without Femoroacetabular Impingement and Developmental Hip Dysplasia.

Authors:  Heidi Prather; Andrew Creighton; Chris Sorenson; Scott Simpson; Maria Reese; Devyani Hunt; Monica Rho
Journal:  PM R       Date:  2017-10-27       Impact factor: 2.298

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.