Literature DB >> 9726305

Pain provocation tests for the assessment of sacroiliac joint dysfunction.

N A Broadhurst1, M J Bond.   

Abstract

A double-blind trial was carried out to determine the sensitivity and specificity of three commonly used pain provocation tests for sacroiliac joint dysfunction. The trial involved 40 patients, all of whom reported pain when they were subjected to each of the three tests. Half of the patients (20) had the symptomatic sacroiliac joint injected with 4 ml of 1% lignocaine, whereas the other 20 patients received 4 ml of normal saline to the painful joint. The level of pain produced by each of the three tests was assessed pre- and posttest injection using a visual analogue scale of 0-100. If the pain could be suppressed by 70% with injection of either normal saline or 1% lignocaine into the symptomatic sacroiliac joint under image intensification, the test was considered to be positive for pain arising from the sacroiliac joint. None of the patients receiving normal saline had their pain suppressed to any significant degree, whereas those patients receiving 1% lignocaine had their pain suppressed sufficiently for the three pain provocation tests to have a specificity of 100% for each test and a sensitivity range of 77-87%. This study indicates that the three tests, when used in combination, have a high predictive value for pain arising from the sacroiliac joint.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9726305

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spinal Disord        ISSN: 0895-0385


  19 in total

1.  Effect of chiropractic treatment on hip extension ability and running velocity among young male running athletes.

Authors:  Jörgen Sandell; Per J Palmgren; Lars Björndahl
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2008-06

2.  International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery Policy 2020 Update-Minimally Invasive Surgical Sacroiliac Joint Fusion (for Chronic Sacroiliac Joint Pain): Coverage Indications, Limitations, and Medical Necessity.

Authors:  Morgan Lorio; Richard Kube; Ali Araghi
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-12-29

3.  ISASS Policy 2016 Update - Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion.

Authors:  Morgan P Lorio
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-07-13

4.  Response to Comments on "Accuracy of the Diagnostic Tests of Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction".

Authors:  Parisa Nejati
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2021-06-16

5.  Specificity, sensitivity, and predictive values of clinical tests of the sacroiliac joint: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Kent Jason Stuber
Journal:  J Can Chiropr Assoc       Date:  2007-03

6.  Referred pain location depends on the affected section of the sacroiliac joint.

Authors:  Daisuke Kurosawa; Eiichi Murakami; Toshimi Aizawa
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-10-05       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 7.  Sacroiliac joint pain after lumbar/lumbosacral fusion: current knowledge.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Yoshihara
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-05-13       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  European guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pelvic girdle pain.

Authors:  Andry Vleeming; Hanne B Albert; Hans Christian Ostgaard; Bengt Sturesson; Britt Stuge
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-02-08       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 9.  Pregnancy-related pelvic girdle pain: an update.

Authors:  Nikolaos K Kanakaris; Craig S Roberts; Peter V Giannoudis
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2011-02-15       Impact factor: 8.775

10.  Accuracy of the Diagnostic Tests of Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction.

Authors:  Parisa Nejati; Elham Sartaj; Farnad Imani; Reza Moeineddin; Lida Nejati; Marta Safavi
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2020-09-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.