Study Design: Cross-sectional study of patients with mechanical low back pain (MLBP). Objective: To test the construct validity of 3 categories of a movement system impairment-based classification proposed for use with patients with MLBP. Background: A pathoanatomic basis for directing treatment has not proven useful in a wide variety of patients with MLBP. In addition, there is a paucity of data describing the movement system impairments that characterize many of the pathoanatomically based MLBP diagnoses. Because of the mechanical nature of MLBP, a system based on groups of signs and symptoms relevant to conservative management needs to be developed. Methods and Measures: A movement system impairment-based classification was proposed that defined 5 categories of MLBP based on the findings from a standardized examination. Using the examination, 5 physical therapists examined a total of 188 patients with MLBP. A principal components analysis with an oblique rotation was conducted. Eigenvalues were plotted and a scree test was used to determine the number of factors to retain. A split-sample cross-validation procedure was conducted to verify the factor structure. Results: Three factors were identified in both samples: 2 factors related to symptoms with lumbar rotation and lumbar extension alignments or movements, and 1 factor related to signs of lumbar rotation with different alignments and movements. Conclusion: Our results provide support for 3 factors related to 3 of the 5 proposed categories: lumbar rotation with extension, lumbar rotation, and lumbar extension. The existence of these 3 factors provides preliminary evidence for specific clusters of tests of alignment and movement impairments that could be used in classifying patients with MLBP into movement-system-related categories.

Among people who participate in rotation-related sports, those with LBP had less overall passive hip rotation motion and more asymmetry of rotation between sides than people without LBP. These findings suggest that the specific directional demands imposed on the hip and trunk during regularly performed activities may be an important consideration in deciding which impairments may be most relevant to test and to consider in prevention and intervention strategies.

No abstract

There is no agreement on how to classify, define or diagnose hip-related pain—a common cause of hip and groin pain in young and middle-aged active adults. This complicates the work of clinicians and researchers. The International Hip-related Pain Research Network consensus group met in November 2018 in Zurich aiming to make recommendations on how to classify, define and diagnose hip disease in young and middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain as the main symptom. Prior to the meeting we performed a scoping review of electronic databases in June 2018 to determine the definition, epidemiology and diagnosis of hip conditions in young and middle-aged active adults presenting with hip-related pain. We developed and presented evidence-based statements for these to a panel of 37 experts for discussion and consensus agreement. Both non-musculoskeletal and serious hip pathological conditions (eg, tumours, infections, stress fractures, slipped capital femoral epiphysis), as well as competing musculoskeletal conditions (eg, lumbar spine) should be excluded when diagnosing hip-related pain in young and middle-aged active adults. The most common hip conditions in young and middle-aged active adults presenting with hip-related pain are: (1) femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome, (2) acetabular dysplasia and/or hip instability and (3) other conditions without a distinct osseous morphology (labral, chondral and/or ligamentum teres conditions), and that these terms are used in research and clinical practice. Clinical examination and diagnostic imaging have limited diagnostic utility; a comprehensive approach is therefore essential. A negative flexion–adduction–internal rotation test helps rule out hip-related pain although its clinical utility is limited. Anteroposterior pelvis and lateral femoral head–neck radiographs are the initial diagnostic imaging of choice—advanced imaging should be performed only when requiring additional detail of bony or soft-tissue morphology (eg, for definitive diagnosis, research setting or when planning surgery). We recommend clear, detailed and consistent methodology of bony morphology outcome measures (definition, measurement and statistical reporting) in research. Future research on conditions with hip-related pain as the main symptom should include high-quality prospective studies on aetiology and prognosis. The most common hip conditions in active adults presenting with hip-related pain are: (1) FAI syndrome, (2) acetabular dysplasia and/or hip instability and (3) other conditions without distinct osseous morphology including labral, chondral and/or ligamentum teres conditions. The last category should not be confused with the incidental imaging findings of labral, chondral and/or ligamentum teres pathology in asymptomatic people. Future research should refine our current recommendations by determining the clinical utility of clinical examination and diagnostic imaging in prospective studies.

STUDY DESIGN Controlled Laboratory Cross-Sectional Study OBJECTIVES To assess strength differences of the hip rotator and abductor muscle groups in young adults with chronic hip joint pain (CHJP) and asymptomatic controls. A secondary objective was to determine if strength in the uninvolved hip of those with unilateral CHJP differs from asymptomatic controls. BACKGROUND Little is known about the relationship between hip muscle strength and CHJP in young adults. METHODS 35 participants with CHJP and 35 matched controls (18 to 40 years of age) participated. Using hand-held dynamometry, strength of the hip external rotators (ERs) and internal rotators (IRs) was assessed with the hip flexed to 90° (ERs90°, IRs90°) and 0° (ERs0°, IRs0°). To assess ER and IR strength, the hip was placed at the end-range of external rotation and internal rotation, respectively. Strength of the hip abductors (ABDs) was assessed in sidelying, with the hip in 15° of abduction. Break tests were performed to determine maximum muscle force and the average torque was calculated using the corresponding moment arm. Independent samples t-tests were used to compare strength values between the 1) involved limb in participants with CHJP and corresponding limb in the matched controls and 2) the uninvolved limb in participants with unilateral CHJP and corresponding limb in the matched controls. RESULTS Compared to controls, participants with CHJP demonstrated weakness of 16–28%, (P<0.01) in all muscle groups tested in the involved hip. The uninvolved hip of 22 subjects with unilateral CHJP demonstrated weakness of 18% and 16% (P<0.05) in the ERs0° and ABDs, respectively when compared to the corresponding limb of the matched controls. CONCLUSION Our results demonstrate that persons with CHJP have weakness in the hip rotator and hip abductor muscles. Weakness also was found in the uninvolved hip of persons with CHJP.