Interexaminer Reliability of Seated Motion Palpation for the Stiffest Spinal Site

Holt, Kelly; Russell, David F.; Cooperstein, Robert; Young, Morgan; Sherson, Matthew W.; Haavik, Heidi

doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2017.08.009

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overview of various descriptors used to describe manual segmental assessment). 5,17,200,202,[215][216][217]177,181,188,191,[193][194][195]198 Resistance 14 29% 8,183,[219][220][221][222]190,193,194,196,201,205,206,218 Restriction 7 14% 18,182,183,197,221,223,224 End feel 5 10% Hypomobility appears to be the most commonly reported descriptor in the literature reviewed (see Table 9) This finding was consistent with Maher and Simmonds 215 findings in relation to how therapists conceptualised and characterised the clinical concept of spinal stiffness. These authors performed a cluster analysis on 31 published descriptors in the literature and identified three superclusters, (i) limited mobility, (ii) increased mobility and (iii)…”

Section: Characteristics Of Studies Classified As Segmental Assessmentsupporting

confidence: 77%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Defining and measuring objective and subjective spinal stiffness: a scoping review

Moses¹

2022

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Characteristics Of Studies Classified As Segmental Assessmentsupporting

confidence: 77%

“…For example, 'quality' of, 18,189 'impression' of, 190,191 and 'perceived' by. 192,193 The most common feature included in definitions was 'resistance' (see Table 8). It appears that stiffness is used synonymously with the term 'resistance' in the manual segmental assessment category.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Studies Classified As Segmental Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining and measuring objective and subjective spinal stiffness: a scoping review

Moses¹

2022

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In stage 1 screening, 1976 citations were ineligible. Forty-seven papers were reviewed in stage 2, and 31 were excluded: ineligible study population (n = 11) [41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51], inappropriate outcome measure (n = 6) [52][53][54][55][56][57], ineligible publication type (n = 4) [58][59][60][61], ineligible sample size (n = 3) [62][63][64], study design (n = 3) [65][66][67] and did not investigate manual palpation (n = 4) [68][69][70][71]. Two authors were contacted for publication type and age range, both responded [27,59].…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and validity of manual palpation for the assessment of patients with low back pain: a systematic and critical review

Nolet

Côté

et al. 2021

Chiropr Man Therap

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Static or motion manual palpation of the low back is commonly used to assess pain location and reproduction in low back pain (LBP) patients. The purpose of this study is to review the reliability and validity of manual palpation used for the assessment of LBP in adults. Method We systematically searched five databases from 2000 to 2019. We critically appraised internal validity of studies using QAREL and QUADAS-2 instruments. We stratified results using best-evidence synthesis. Validity studies were classified according to Sackett and Haynes. Results We identified 2023 eligible articles, of which 14 were low risk of bias. Evidence suggests that reliability of soft tissue structures palpation is inconsistent, and reliability of bony structures and joint mobility palpation is poor. We found preliminary evidence that gluteal muscle palpation for tenderness may be valid in differentiating LBP patients with and without radiculopathy. Conclusion Reliability of manual palpation tests in the assessment of LBP patients varies greatly. This is problematic because these tests are commonly used by manual therapists and clinicians. Little is known about the validity of these tests; therefore, their clinical utility is uncertain. High quality validity studies are needed to inform the clinical use of manual palpation tests.

show abstract

“…139 Holt and Russell et al developed an interexaminer reliability protocol that combined the confidence rating, continuous measures, and extensive training. [140][141][142] After a period of training, patients were examined using multidimensional criteria. 141 Two examiners were trained and asked to rate their confidence levels and determine site of cervical, thoracic, and lumbar CVS using leg checks, soft tissue palpation, joint play, and motion palpation assessments, and they found that reliability was good.…”

Section: Critical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[140][141][142] After a period of training, patients were examined using multidimensional criteria. 141 Two examiners were trained and asked to rate their confidence levels and determine site of cervical, thoracic, and lumbar CVS using leg checks, soft tissue palpation, joint play, and motion palpation assessments, and they found that reliability was good. Until older studies are repeated with these protocols, arguments that rely upon the limited earlier studies as evidence to support arguments about the veracity of CVS detection should be considered tentative.…”

Section: Critical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

The Chiropractic Vertebral Subluxation Part 9: Complexes, Models, and Consensus From 1979 to 1995

Senzon

2018

Journal of Chiropractic Humanities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The purpose of this paper is to review and discuss the history of chiropractic vertebral subluxation (CVS) between 1979 and 1995, with an emphasis on complexes, models, and consensus. Discussion: New models were developed and critiqued during this period. The first subluxation complex model was proposed by Faye. Other theorists such as Lantz and Dishman built upon his model. The complex models were integrated into consensus statements by the International Chiropractic Association and the American Chiropractic Association, and later by profession-wide processes. The plurality of the CVS encompassed known theories and included integration of stress models and biochemistry. The professional consensus around CVS was comprehensive as shown by the process models that included stakeholders in the profession. Calls for more empirical research and changes to terminology increased during this era. Influential articles from this period potentially contained errors and relied on older studies that may no longer be valid. Conclusion: The challenges to researching this complex entity during that time were daunting for many and pointed to challenges of using the word "subluxation" to encompass the multiplicity that defined CVS.

show abstract

Interexaminer Reliability of Seated Motion Palpation for the Stiffest Spinal Site

Cited by 11 publications

References 23 publications

Defining and measuring objective and subjective spinal stiffness: a scoping review

Defining and measuring objective and subjective spinal stiffness: a scoping review

Reliability and validity of manual palpation for the assessment of patients with low back pain: a systematic and critical review

The Chiropractic Vertebral Subluxation Part 9: Complexes, Models, and Consensus From 1979 to 1995

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About