The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society · 2013
The evaluation of lumbar multifidus muscle function via palpation: reliability and validity of a new clinical test.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hebert Jeffrey J, Koppenhaver Shane L, Teyhen Deydre S, Walker Bruce F, Fritz Julie M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The lumbar multifidus muscle provides an important contribution to lumbar spine stability, and the restoration of lumbar multifidus function is a frequent goal of rehabilitation. Currently, there are no reliable and valid physical examination procedures available to assess lumbar multifidus function among patients with low back pain.
PURPOSE: To examine the inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity of the multifidus lift test (MLT) to identify lumbar multifidus dysfunction among patients with low back pain.
STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A cross-sectional analysis of reliability and concurrent validity performed in a university outpatient research facility.
PATIENT SAMPLE: Thirty-two persons aged 18 to 60 years with current low back pain and a minimum modified Oswestry disability score of 20%. Study participants were excluded if they reported a history of lumbar spine surgery, lumbar radiculopathy, medical red flags, osteoporosis, or had recently been treated with spinal manipulation or trunk stabilization exercises.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Concurrent measures of lumbar multifidus muscle function at the L4-L5 and L5-S1 levels were obtained with the MLT (index test) and real-time ultrasound imaging (reference standard).
METHODS: The inter-rater reliability of the MLT was examined by measuring the level of agreement between two blinded examiners. Concurrent validity of the MLT was investigated by comparing clinicians' judgments with real-time ultrasound imaging measures of lumbar multifidus function.
RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability of the MLT was substantial to excellent (κ=0.75 to 0.81, p≤.01) and free from errors of bias and prevalence. When performed at L4-L5 or L5-S1, the MLT demonstrated evidence of concurrent validity through its relationship with the reference standard results at L4-L5 (rbis=0.59-0.73, p≤.01). The MLT generally failed to demonstrate a relationship with the reference standard results from the L5-S1 level.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide preliminary evidence supporting the reliability and validity of the MLT to assess lumbar multifidus function at the L4-L5 spinal level. Additional research examining the measurement properties and utility of this test should be undertaken before confident implementation with patients.
PURPOSE: To examine the inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity of the multifidus lift test (MLT) to identify lumbar multifidus dysfunction among patients with low back pain.
STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A cross-sectional analysis of reliability and concurrent validity performed in a university outpatient research facility.
PATIENT SAMPLE: Thirty-two persons aged 18 to 60 years with current low back pain and a minimum modified Oswestry disability score of 20%. Study participants were excluded if they reported a history of lumbar spine surgery, lumbar radiculopathy, medical red flags, osteoporosis, or had recently been treated with spinal manipulation or trunk stabilization exercises.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Concurrent measures of lumbar multifidus muscle function at the L4-L5 and L5-S1 levels were obtained with the MLT (index test) and real-time ultrasound imaging (reference standard).
METHODS: The inter-rater reliability of the MLT was examined by measuring the level of agreement between two blinded examiners. Concurrent validity of the MLT was investigated by comparing clinicians' judgments with real-time ultrasound imaging measures of lumbar multifidus function.
RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability of the MLT was substantial to excellent (κ=0.75 to 0.81, p≤.01) and free from errors of bias and prevalence. When performed at L4-L5 or L5-S1, the MLT demonstrated evidence of concurrent validity through its relationship with the reference standard results at L4-L5 (rbis=0.59-0.73, p≤.01). The MLT generally failed to demonstrate a relationship with the reference standard results from the L5-S1 level.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide preliminary evidence supporting the reliability and validity of the MLT to assess lumbar multifidus function at the L4-L5 spinal level. Additional research examining the measurement properties and utility of this test should be undertaken before confident implementation with patients.