Literature DB >> 24965495

Criterion validity of manual assessment of spinal stiffness.

Shane L Koppenhaver1, Jeffrey J Hebert2, Greg N Kawchuk3, John D Childs4, Deydre S Teyhen5, Theodore Croy5, Julie M Fritz6.   

Abstract

Assessment of spinal stiffness is widely used by manual therapy practitioners as a part of clinical diagnosis and treatment selection. Although studies have commonly found poor reliability of such procedures, conflicting evidence suggests that assessment of spinal stiffness may help predict response to specific treatments. The current study evaluated the criterion validity of manual assessments of spinal stiffness by comparing them to indentation measurements in patients with low back pain (LBP). As part of a standard examination, an experienced clinician assessed passive accessory spinal stiffness of the L3 vertebrae using posterior to anterior (PA) force on the spinous process of L3 in 50 subjects (54% female, mean (SD) age = 33.0 (12.8) years, BMI = 27.0 (6.0) kg/m(2)) with LBP. A criterion measure of spinal stiffness was performed using mechanized indentation by a blinded second examiner. Results indicated that manual assessments were uncorrelated to criterion measures of stiffness (spearman rho = 0.06, p = 0.67). Similarly, sensitivity and specificity estimates of judgments of hypomobility were low (0.20-0.45) and likelihood ratios were generally not statistically significant. Sensitivity and specificity of judgments of hypermobility were not calculated due to limited prevalence. Additional analysis found that BMI explained 32% of the variance in the criterion measure of stiffness, yet failed to improve the relationship between assessments. Additional studies should investigate whether manual assessment of stiffness relates to other clinical and biomechanical constructs, such as symptom reproduction, angular rotation, quality of motion, or end feel. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Low back pain; Manual assessment; Stiffness; Validity

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24965495      PMCID: PMC4252603          DOI: 10.1016/j.math.2014.06.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Man Ther        ISSN: 1356-689X


  32 in total

1.  Effect of direction of applied mobilization force on the posteroanterior response in the lumbar spine.

Authors:  B Caling; M Lee
Journal:  J Manipulative Physiol Ther       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 1.437

2.  Objective manual assessment of lumbar posteroanterior stiffness is now possible.

Authors:  Adit Chiradejnant; Christopher G Maher; Jane Latimer
Journal:  J Manipulative Physiol Ther       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 1.437

Review 3.  Inter-examiner reliability of passive assessment of intervertebral motion in the cervical and lumbar spine: a systematic review.

Authors:  E van Trijffel; Q Anderegg; P M M Bossuyt; C Lucas
Journal:  Man Ther       Date:  2005-07-01

4.  Manual physical assessment of spinal segmental motion: intent and validity.

Authors:  J Haxby Abbott; Timothy W Flynn; Julie M Fritz; Wayne A Hing; Duncan Reid; Julie M Whitman
Journal:  Man Ther       Date:  2007-11-07

5.  Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain.

Authors:  John D Childs; Sara R Piva; Julie M Fritz
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Preliminary investigation of the mechanisms underlying the effects of manipulation: exploration of a multivariate model including spinal stiffness, multifidus recruitment, and clinical findings.

Authors:  Julie M Fritz; Shane L Koppenhaver; Gregory N Kawchuk; Deydre S Teyhen; Jeffrey J Hebert; John D Childs
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2011-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Motion palpation findings and self-reported low back pain in a population-based study sample.

Authors:  Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde; Jakob van Dijk; Claudia Franz; Stig Arthur Hustad; Dorthe Olsen; Tom Pihl; Robert Röbech; Susanne Skov Vendrup; Tom Bendix; Kirsten Ohm Kyvik
Journal:  J Manipulative Physiol Ther       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 1.437

Review 8.  Reliability of spinal palpation for diagnosis of back and neck pain: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Michael A Seffinger; Wadie I Najm; Shiraz I Mishra; Alan Adams; Vivian M Dickerson; Linda S Murphy; Sibylle Reinsch
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Subgrouping patients with low back pain: a treatment-based approach to classification.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Hebert; Shane L Koppenhaver; Bruce F Walker
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 3.843

10.  Lumbar segmental instability: a criterion-related validity study of manual therapy assessment.

Authors:  J Haxby Abbott; Brendan McCane; Peter Herbison; Graeme Moginie; Cathy Chapple; Tracy Hogarty
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2005-11-07       Impact factor: 2.362

View more
  3 in total

1.  Interrater Reliability of Motion Palpation in the Thoracic Spine.

Authors:  Bruce F Walker; Shane L Koppenhaver; Norman J Stomski; Jeffrey J Hebert
Journal:  Evid Based Complement Alternat Med       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 2.629

2.  Changes in spinal stiffness with chronic thoracic pain: Correlation with pain and muscle activity.

Authors:  Isabelle Pagé; François Nougarou; Arnaud Lardon; Martin Descarreaux
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-11       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Distinguishing chronic low back pain in young adults with mild to moderate pain and disability using trunk compliance.

Authors:  Alexander Stamenkovic; Brian C Clark; Peter E Pidcoe; Susanne M van der Veen; Christopher R France; David W Russ; Patricia A Kinser; James S Thomas
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-04-07       Impact factor: 4.379

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.