Cargando…

Inter-rater agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of the prone hip extension test and active straight leg raise test

BACKGROUND: Two clinical tests used to assess for neuromuscular control deficits in low back pain (LBP) patients are the prone hip extension (PHE) test and active straight leg raise (ASLR) test. For these tests, it has been suggested examiners classify patients as “positive” or “negative” based on t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bruno, Paul A, Millar, David P, Goertzen, Dale A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4075776/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24982755
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2045-709X-22-23
_version_ 1782323390795743232
author Bruno, Paul A
Millar, David P
Goertzen, Dale A
author_facet Bruno, Paul A
Millar, David P
Goertzen, Dale A
author_sort Bruno, Paul A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Two clinical tests used to assess for neuromuscular control deficits in low back pain (LBP) patients are the prone hip extension (PHE) test and active straight leg raise (ASLR) test. For these tests, it has been suggested examiners classify patients as “positive” or “negative” based on the presence or absence (respectively) of specific “abnormal” lumbopelvic motion patterns. The inter-rater agreement of such a classification scheme has been reported for the PHE test, but not for the ASLR test. In addition, the sensitivity and specificity of such classification schemes have not been reported for either test. The primary objectives of the current study were to investigate: 1) the inter-rater agreement of the examiner-reported classification schemes for these two tests, and 2) the sensitivity and specificity of the classification schemes. METHODS: Thirty participants with LBP and 40 asymptomatic controls took part in this cross-sectional observational study. Participants performed 3–4 repetitions of each test whilst two examiners classified them as “positive” or “negative” based on the presence or absence (respectively) of specific “abnormal” lumbopelvic motion patterns. The inter-rater agreement (Kappa statistic), sensitivity (LBP patients), and specificity (controls) were calculated for each test. RESULTS: Both tests demonstrated substantial inter-rater agreement (PHE test: Kappa = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.57-0.95, p < 0.001; ASLR test: Kappa = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.57-0.96, p < 0.001). For the PHE test, the sensitivity was 0.18-0.27 and the specificity was 0.63-0.78; the odds ratio (OR) of “positive” classifications in the LBP group was 1.25 (95% CI = 0.58-2.72; Examiner 1) and 1.27 (95% CI = 0.52-3.12; Examiner 2). For the ASLR test, the sensitivity was 0.20-0.25 and the specificity was 0.84-0.86; the OR of “positive” classifications in the LBP group was 1.72 (95% CI = 0.75-3.95; Examiner 1) and 1.57 (95% CI = 0.64-3.85; Examiner 2). CONCLUSION: Classification schemes for the PHE test and ASLR test based on the presence or absence of specific “abnormal” lumbopelvic motion patterns demonstrated substantial inter-rater agreement. However, additional investigation is required to further comment on the clinical usefulness of the motion patterns demonstrated by LBP patients during these tests as a diagnostic tool or treatment outcome.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4075776
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40757762014-07-01 Inter-rater agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of the prone hip extension test and active straight leg raise test Bruno, Paul A Millar, David P Goertzen, Dale A Chiropr Man Therap Research BACKGROUND: Two clinical tests used to assess for neuromuscular control deficits in low back pain (LBP) patients are the prone hip extension (PHE) test and active straight leg raise (ASLR) test. For these tests, it has been suggested examiners classify patients as “positive” or “negative” based on the presence or absence (respectively) of specific “abnormal” lumbopelvic motion patterns. The inter-rater agreement of such a classification scheme has been reported for the PHE test, but not for the ASLR test. In addition, the sensitivity and specificity of such classification schemes have not been reported for either test. The primary objectives of the current study were to investigate: 1) the inter-rater agreement of the examiner-reported classification schemes for these two tests, and 2) the sensitivity and specificity of the classification schemes. METHODS: Thirty participants with LBP and 40 asymptomatic controls took part in this cross-sectional observational study. Participants performed 3–4 repetitions of each test whilst two examiners classified them as “positive” or “negative” based on the presence or absence (respectively) of specific “abnormal” lumbopelvic motion patterns. The inter-rater agreement (Kappa statistic), sensitivity (LBP patients), and specificity (controls) were calculated for each test. RESULTS: Both tests demonstrated substantial inter-rater agreement (PHE test: Kappa = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.57-0.95, p < 0.001; ASLR test: Kappa = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.57-0.96, p < 0.001). For the PHE test, the sensitivity was 0.18-0.27 and the specificity was 0.63-0.78; the odds ratio (OR) of “positive” classifications in the LBP group was 1.25 (95% CI = 0.58-2.72; Examiner 1) and 1.27 (95% CI = 0.52-3.12; Examiner 2). For the ASLR test, the sensitivity was 0.20-0.25 and the specificity was 0.84-0.86; the OR of “positive” classifications in the LBP group was 1.72 (95% CI = 0.75-3.95; Examiner 1) and 1.57 (95% CI = 0.64-3.85; Examiner 2). CONCLUSION: Classification schemes for the PHE test and ASLR test based on the presence or absence of specific “abnormal” lumbopelvic motion patterns demonstrated substantial inter-rater agreement. However, additional investigation is required to further comment on the clinical usefulness of the motion patterns demonstrated by LBP patients during these tests as a diagnostic tool or treatment outcome. BioMed Central 2014-06-16 /pmc/articles/PMC4075776/ /pubmed/24982755 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2045-709X-22-23 Text en Copyright © 2014 Bruno et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Bruno, Paul A
Millar, David P
Goertzen, Dale A
Inter-rater agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of the prone hip extension test and active straight leg raise test
title Inter-rater agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of the prone hip extension test and active straight leg raise test
title_full Inter-rater agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of the prone hip extension test and active straight leg raise test
title_fullStr Inter-rater agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of the prone hip extension test and active straight leg raise test
title_full_unstemmed Inter-rater agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of the prone hip extension test and active straight leg raise test
title_short Inter-rater agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of the prone hip extension test and active straight leg raise test
title_sort inter-rater agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of the prone hip extension test and active straight leg raise test
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4075776/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24982755
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2045-709X-22-23
work_keys_str_mv AT brunopaula interrateragreementsensitivityandspecificityofthepronehipextensiontestandactivestraightlegraisetest
AT millardavidp interrateragreementsensitivityandspecificityofthepronehipextensiontestandactivestraightlegraisetest
AT goertzendalea interrateragreementsensitivityandspecificityofthepronehipextensiontestandactivestraightlegraisetest