首页> 外文OA文献 >Association between history and physical examination factors and change in lumbar multifidus muscle thickness after spinal manipulation in patients with low back pain
【2h】

Association between history and physical examination factors and change in lumbar multifidus muscle thickness after spinal manipulation in patients with low back pain

机译:腰背痛患者脊柱手术后历史与体格因素及腰椎多裂肌厚度变化的关系

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

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 ¼ 33.0 (12.8) years, BMI ¼ 27.0 (6.0) kg/m2) 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 ¼ 0.06, p ¼ 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.
机译:脊柱僵硬的评估已被手动治疗从业人员广泛用作临床诊断和治疗选择的一部分。尽管研究通常发现此类手术的可靠性较差,但有相反的证据表明,评估脊柱僵硬程度可能有助于预测对特定治疗的反应。本研究通过将其与腰背痛(LBP)患者的压痕测量值进行比较,评估了手动评估脊柱僵硬度的标准有效性。作为标准检查的一部分,经验丰富的临床医生对50位受试者(54%的女性,平均(SD)年龄¼33.0(12.8))使用后向前(PA)力对L3的棘突评估了L3椎体的被动副脊椎硬度)年(BMI¼27.0(6.0)kg / m2)和LBP。盲人的第二位检查员使用机械压痕进行了脊柱僵硬的标准测量。结果表明,手动评估与标准的刚度测量方法无关(矛长rho¼0.06,p¼0.67)。同样,对运动不足判断的敏感性和特异性估计较低(0.20-0.45),似然比通常在统计学上不显着。由于患病率有限,因此未计算运动过度判断的敏感性和特异性。进一步的分析发现,BMI解释了硬度标准度量中32%的方差,但未能改善评估之间的关系。进一步的研究应调查手动评估刚度是否与其他临床和生物力学构造有关,例如症状再现,角度旋转,运动质量或末端感觉。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号