1
Differential Dx of Lumbar Spine, Pelvis & Hip
Michael Reiman, PT, DPT, OCS, SCS, ATC, FAAOMPT, CSCS
Assistant Professor - Duke University PT Duke University Medical Center
Differential Diagnosis of Lumbar Spine, Pelvis, and Hip
Michael P. Reiman, PT, DPT, OCS, SCS, ATC, FAAOMPT, CSCS
Assistant Professor
Duke University Medical Center
Cross Country Education
Leading the Way in Continuing Education and Professional Development. www.CrossCountryEducation.com
To comply with professional boards/associations standards:
• I declare that I or my family (do, do not) have any financial relationship in any amount, occurring in the last 12 months with a commercial interest whose products or services are discussed in my presentation. Additionally, all planners involved do not have any financial relationship. •Requirements for successful completion are attendance for the full session along with a completed session evaluation form. •Cross Country Education and all current accreditation statuses does not imply endorsement of any commercial products displayed in conjunction with this activity.
Objectives
• 1. Using an algorithm, evidence based approach, be able to describe a systematic approach to evaluation of the lumbar spine.
• 2. Using an algorithm, evidence based approach,
be able to describe a systematic approach to evaluation of the pelvis.
• 3.Using an algorithm, evidence based approach,
be able to describe a systematic approach to evaluation of the hip joint.
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
2
Diagnostic Accuracy
4
True positive a False positive b
False negative c True negative d
Pathology
Present (+) Absent (-)
Test (+)
Test (-)
Sensitivity (Sn) = a/(a+c)
Specificity (Sp) = d/(b+d)
(+) LR = Sn/(1-Sp)
(-) LR = (1-Sn)/Sp
SpPin SnNout
Sensitivity
5
• The proportion of people with the target disorder who have a positive test
• For a test to be useful in ruling out a disease, it must have a high sensitivity.
Specificity
6
• The proportion of people without the target disorder who have a negative test
• For a test to be useful at confirming a disease, it must have a high specificity.
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
3
(+) Likelihood Ratio
7
• sensitivity / (1 - specificity) or a/(a + c) / b/(b +d) • The LR of a positive test tells us how well a
positive test result does by comparing its performance when the disease is present compared with when it is absent
• The best test to use for ruling in a disease is the one with the largest likelihood ratio of a positive test.
(-) Likelihood Ratio
8
• (1 - sensitivity) / specificity or c/(a + c) / d/(b + d) • The LR of a negative test tells us how well a
negative test result does by comparing its performance when the disease is absent compared with when it is present
• The better test to use to rule out disease is the one with the smaller likelihood ratio of a negative test.
How much do LRs change disease likelihood?
9
LRs > 10 or < 0.1 Cause large changes
LRs 5 - 10 or 0.1 - 0.2 Cause moderate changes
LRs 2 - 5 or 0.2 - 0.5 Cause small changes
LRs < 2 or > 0.5 Cause tiny changes
LRs = 1.0 Cause no change at all
Sackett, D. Evidence-Based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM. 2nd ed. (CD-ROM) Churchill Livingstone, 2000.
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
4
Likelihood Ratios
10
(+) LR Explanation (-) LR
1 – 2 Alters posttest probability of a diagnosis to a minimal degree .5 – 1
2 – 5 Alters posttest probability of a diagnosis to a small degree .2 - .5
5 – 10 Alters posttest probability of a diagnosis to a moderate degree .1 - .2
> 10 Alters posttest probability of a diagnosis significantly and almost conclusively
< .1
Concordant Sign/Response
11
• An activity or movement that provokes the patient’s ‘familiar sign’ (the pain or other symptoms identified on a pain drawing and verified by the patient as being the complaint that has prompted one to seek diagnosis and treatment.)
Discordant Pain Response
12
• A finding that may be painful or abnormal, but not related to the concordant sign as the
“discordant pain response”.
Cook C. Evidence based orthopedic manual therapy. Upper Saddle River:Prentice Hall; 2007.
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
5
Clinical Reasoning
13
• Each component of the clinical exam is a “test” with its own ability to shift probability
– History
– ROM
– Muscle performance
– Assessment of function
• Special tests
Clinical Reasoning in GP’s
14
• A major cause of misdiagnoses is failure to properly integrate clinical data.
Groves et al. The clinical reasoning characteristics of diagnostic experts. Med Teach. 2003; 25(3):308-13.
Clinical Reasoning of Pain
15
• Results showed a dynamic, multidimensional nature to the therapists' clinical reasoning, which was found to be grounded in a number of established models of pain – (i) biomedical, (ii) psychosocial, (iii) pain
mechanisms, (iv) chronicity and (v) irritability/severity
Smart K, Doody C. The clinical reasoning of pain by experienced musculoskeletal physiotherapists. Man Ther. 2007; 12(1):40-9.
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
6
Pain Generator? Bogduk et al,
1995
• 39% Discogenic
• 15% Facet
• 13% SIJ
• 33% Undefined
Laslett & April 2003
• 65% Discogenic
• 15% Facet
• 7% SIJ
• 13% Undefined
Depalma et al. 2011
• 42% Discogenic • 31% Facet • 18% SIJ
Schwarzer et al. Spine. 1995
• Disc: 39% • Facet joint:
15% • SIJ: 13%
Sembrano & Polly. Spine 2008
• 65% spine only • 17.5% Spine and Hip/SIJ • 8% Hip/SI and no spine at all • 10% ??? • Overall, 12.5% had hip pathology and
14.5% and SIJ
Ugh!
• There are numerous pain generators of L spine; many are clinically difficult to isolate secondary to convergence
Bogduk N, et al. A universal model of the lumbar back muscles in the upright position. Spine. 1992;17(8):897-913.
Treatment Based Classification
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
7
• 25.2% did not meet the criteria for any subgroup
• 49.6% met the criteria for only one subgroup
• 25.2% met the criteria for more than one subgroup
• Most common combination of subgroups was manipulation + specific exercise (68.4%)
• Reliability of the algorithm decision was moderate (kappa=0.52)
19
TBC
Stanton TR, Fritz JM, Hancock MJ, et al. Evaluation of a treatment-based classification algorithm for low back pain: a cross-sectional study. Phys Ther. 2011;91(4):496-509.
Rule OUT Lumbar Spine
Imaging
• Absence of degeneration on MRI was the only test found to reduce the likelihood of the disc as the source of pain: –LR = 0.21
Hancock MJ, et al. Systematic review of tests to identify the disc, SIJ or facet joint as the source of low back pain. Eur Spine J. 2007; 16:1539–1550.
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
8
Imaging
• No correlation with pathology on imaging and symptoms
• L – Spine Weber U, Maksymowych WP. Am. J. Med. Sci. 2011.; Carragee EJ, et al. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000.; Carragee E, et al. Spine J. 2006.; Jensen MC, et al. N. Engl. J. Med. 1994.; Borenstein DG, et al. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2001.; Maus T. Phys. Med. Rehabil. Clin. N. Am. 2010.; Modic MT, et al. Radiology. 2005
• Hip Silvis ML, et al. Am. J. Sports Med. 2011.; Jung KA, Restrepo C, et al. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 2011; Gerhardt MB, et al. Am. J. Sports Med. 2012;
Hartofilakidis G, et al. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 2011
22
Modic et al. Radiology. 2005
• MR imaging does not appear to have a measurable value in terms of planning conservative care
• Patient knowledge of imaging findings does not alter outcome, may be counterproductive and is associated with a lesser sense of well-being
Patient Hx. Considerations
Sciatica due to disc herniation
• Pain below knee (Sn 90%) (Vroomen et al. J Neurol. 1999)
Stenosis
• No pain when seated: (Sp 93%) (Katz et al. Arthritis Rheum. 1995)
• Symptoms improved seated: (Sp 83%)(Katz et al.1995)
• Best posture: sitting (Sn 89%) (Fritz et al. J Spinal Disord.
1997)
• Worst posture: stand or walk (Sn 89%) (Fritz et al. J
Spinal Disord. 1997)
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
9
Patient Hx. Considerations
Facet Joint
• Pain reduced with recumbancy (Sn 89%) (Revel et
al. 1992; Revel et al. 1998)
• Rest of Revel’s criterion lack sufficient evidence
Hancock MJ, et al. Systematic review of tests to identify the disc, SIJ or facet joint as the source of low back pain. Eur Spine J. 2007; 16:1539–1550.
Radiculopathy/Discogenic signs and symptoms
Reflexes, Myotomes, Sensation • Babinski (UMN): SN 80%, SP 90%, QUADAS 7 (Berger JR, Fannin M. The “bedsheet”
Babinski. South Med J. 2002; 95(10):1178-1179.)
• Achilles DTR: SN 87%, SP 89%, QUADAS 7 (Kerr RSC, Cadoux-Hudson TA, Adams CBT. The
value of accurate clinical assessment in the surgical management of the lumbar disc protrusion. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatr.
1988;51:169-173.)
• Extensor Digitorum Brevis: SN 14%, SP 91%, QUADAS 8 Stankovic R, Johnell O,
Maly P, Willner S. Use of lumbar extension, slump test, physical and neurological examination in the evaluation of patients with suspected herniated nucleus pulposus: a prospective clinical study. Man Ther. 1999;4(1):25-32.
• Myotomal Testing (L3-S1): SN 0-28%, SP 100%, QUADAS 7 (Kerr et al. 1988)
• Sensation (light touch, sharp/dull): SN 50%, SP 100%, QUADAS 8 Peeters GG, Aufdemkampe G, Oostendorp RA. Sensibility testing in patients with a lumbosacral radicular syndrome. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1998;21:115-128.
• Combined Testing (sensory, weakness, reflexes) SN 12%, SP100%, QUADAS 6* Lauder T, Dilingham T, Andary M, Kumar S, Pezzin L, Stephens R. Predicting electrodiagnostic
outcome in patients with upper limb symptoms: are the history and physical examination helpful? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000;81:436-441.
Radiculopathy/Discogenic signs and symptoms
Range-of-Motion • Centralization/Peripheralization 5-20 reps
– SN 92%, SP 64% QUADAS 12 (Donelson R, Aprill C, Medcalf R, Grant W. A prospective study of centralization of lumbar and referred pain. A predictor of symptomatic discs and anular competence. Spine. 1997;22(10):1115-1122.)
– SN 40%, SP 94% QUADAS 13 (Laslett M, Oberg B, Aprill CN, McDonald B. Centralization as a predictor of provocation discography results in chronic low back pain, and the influence of disability and distress on diagnostic power. Spine J. 2005;5(4):370-380.
• Extension Loss – SN 27%, SP 87%, QUADAS 10 (Laslett M, Aprill CN, McDonald B,
Centralization as a predictor of provocation discography: a study of clinical predictors of lumbar provocation discography. Eur Spine J. 2006;1-12.)
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
10
Radiculopathy/Discogenic signs and symptoms Special Tests
• Straight leg raise test – SN 97%, SP 57%, QUADAS 10 (Vroomen P, de Krom M, Wilmink J,
Kester A, Knottnerus J. Diagnostic value of history and physical examination in patients suspected of lumbosacral nerve root compression. J Neurol Neurosurg Psyciatry. 2002;72:630-634.)
• Slump test – SN 83%, spec 55%, QUADAS 11 (Stankovic R, Johnell O, Maly P,
Willner S. Use of lumbar extension, slump test, physical and neurological examination in the evaluation of patients with suspected herniated nucleus pulposus: a prospective clinical study. Man Ther. 1999;4(1):25-32.)
• Well-Leg Raise – SN 24%, SP 100%, QUADAS 7 (Kosteljanetz M, Bang F, Schmidt-
Olsen S. The clinical significance of straight leg raising (Lasegue’s sign) in the diagnosis of prolapsed lumbar disc. Spine. 1998;13:393-395.)
Mobility
• PA’s (useful to identify impaired segment)
– SN 43%, SP 95%, QUADAS 12 (Fritz JM, Piva S, Childs J.
Accuracy of the clinical examination to predict radiographic instability of the lumbar spine. Eur Spine J. 2005;14(8):743-50.)
Rule OUT Pelvic Girdle
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
11
Pelvic Girdle Diagnosis
• Signs and symptoms
• Special Testing
– Static anatomical position
testing
– Motion palpation testing
– Pain provocation testing
Static Anatomical Position Testing
• Palpation of Sacral Sulcus, Pubic symphysis, ASIS, and iliac crests to detect differences from side to side
• Multiple studies have concluded caution should be used if performing these tests during assessment
Motion Palpation Testing
• “Motion of the SIJ is limited to minute amounts of rotation and of translation suggesting that clinical methods utilizing palpation for diagnosing SIJ pathology may have limited clinical utility.”
• Multiple studies have concluded caution should be used if performing these tests during assessment
Goode et al. Three-Dimensional Movements of the Sacroiliac Joint: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Assessment of Clinical Utility. JMMT. 2008; 16:25–38.
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
12
Goode et al. Three-Dimensional Movements of the Sacroiliac Joint: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Assessment of Clinical Utility. JMMT. 2008; 16:25–38.
Anatomic Landmark and Motion Testing
• Gillet’s (+LR 1.2)
• Long sit test (+LR 1.13)
• Standing Flexion Test (+ LR 0.81)
• Standing ASIS Asymmetry > 3mm (+LR 0.94)
• Standing PSIS Asymmetry >3mm (+LR 1.11)
• Seated PSIS Asymmetry >3mm (+LR 0.88)
Levangie P. Four clinical tests of sacroiliac joint dysfunction: the association of test results with innominate torsion among patients with and without low back pain. Phys Ther. 1999; 79:1043-1057.
Accessory Motion
Medial to PSIS
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
13
Sensitivity .91, Specificity .78, +LR 4.16, -LR .12
Laslett, et al. assessed the diagnostic utility of the McKenzie method of mechanical assessment combined with the following sacroiliac tests: Distraction, thigh thrust, Gaenslen, sacral thrust, and compression McKenzie assessment consisted of flexion in standing, extension in standing, right and left sidegliding, flexion in lying, and extension in lying. The movements were repeated in sets of 10, and centralization and peripheralization were recorded. If it was determined that repeated movements resulted in centralization, the patient was considered to present with pain of discogenic origin. If discogenic origin of pain was ruled out the cluster of tests exhibited:
Laslett M, Young SB, Aprill CN, McDonald B. Diagnosing painful sacroiliac joints: a validity study of a McKenzie evaluation and sacroiliac provocation tests. Aust J Physiother. 2003; 49:89-97.
SI Joint – Thigh Thrust Test
• The patient is supine and the hip and knee are flexed to 900. The examiner provides compression along the long axis of the femur using a hand under the patient’s sacrum as a wedge to create shearing force at the SIJ.
SN 88; LR- 0.17
• 30 seconds • Thrust at end
Laslett M, Aprill CN, McDonald B, Young SB. Diagnosis of sacroiliac joint pain: validity of individual provocation tests and composites of tests. Man Ther. 2005;10(3):207-218.
Gaenslen’s Test
SN .71, SP .26,
+LR 1.0, -LR 1.12
Dreyfuss P, Michaelsen M, Pauza K, McLarty J, Bogduk N. The value of medical history and physical examination in diagnosing sacroiliac joint pain. Spine 1996; 21:2594-2602.
• Overpressure into hip flexion and hip extension
• 3-5 torsions
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
14
Distraction
SN .60, SP .81, +LR 3.20, -LR .49
Laslett M, Aprill CN, McDonald B, Young SB. Diagnosis of sacroiliac joint pain: validation of individual provocation test and composites of tests. Man Ther. 2005; 10:207-218.
• 30 seconds • Bounce force at end
Compression
SN .69, SP .69
+LR 2.20, -LR .46
Laslett M, Aprill CN, McDonald B, Young SB. Diagnosis of sacroiliac joint pain: validation of individual
provocation test and composites of tests. Man Ther. 2005; 10:207-218.
**For Ankylosing Spondylitis**
SN .30, SP .90, +LR 3.0, -LR .78 Russell A, Maksymowych W, LeClerq C. Clinical examination of the sacroiliac joints: a prospective study. Arthritis Rheum. 1981; 24:1575-1577.
• 30 seconds • Bounce force at end
Sacral Thrust
SN .63, SP .75
+LR 2.50, -LR .50
Laslett M, Aprill CN, McDonald B, Young SB. Diagnosis of sacroiliac joint pain: validation of individual provocation test and composites of tests. Man Ther. 2005; 10:207-218.
**For Ankylosing Spondylitis**
SN .53, SP .29, +LR .75, -LR 1.62 Dreyfuss P, Michaelsen M, Pauza K, McLarty J, Bogduk N. The value of medical history and physical examination in diagnosing sacroiliac joint pain. Spine 1996; 21:2594-2602.
• 3-5 hard thrusts at S3
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
15
Pelvic Girdle Pain/Pelvic Instability
• The patient is supine with legs 20 cm apart and asked to raise one leg while rating the difficulty of the lift. The process is repeated on the opposite leg. A belt is placed securely around the pelvis and each leg lift is repeated and the patient is asked whether the lift was more difficult, as difficult, or easier than the lifts without the belt
SN 87; SP 94; LR+ 14.5
Active Straight Leg Raise
Mens J et al. Validity of the active straight leg test for measuring disease severity in patient with posterior pelvic pain after pregnancy. Spine. 2002; 27: 196-200
Stork Test – Movement Test
• Pattern of intrapelvic load during transfer
• Patient lifts one leg and
• maintains single leg stance
• (+) = PSIS moves cephalic with respect to S2 during load transfer
• (-) = PSIS stays neutral or moves caudal
• Hypomobility?
Stork Test and ASLR
• Together, these tests measure the presence of a pelvic ring instability AND poor neuromuscular control during loading
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
16
SI Provocative Tests (European Guidelines – Dx. & Tx. PGP)
• Recommendation
– The following tests are recommended for clinical examination of PGP:
• SIJ Pain – Posterior pelvic pain provocation test (P4/thigh
thrust)
– Patrick’s/FABER test
– Palpation of the long dorsal SIJ ligament
– Gaenslen´s test
SI Provocation Tests (European Guidelines – Dx. & Tx. PGP)
• Symphysis
– Palpation of the symphysis and the modified Trendelenburg function test of the pelvic girdle
• Functional pelvic test
– Active straight leg raise test (ASLR)
Modified Trendelenburg Test • Pubic Symphysis Movement • Rotates 3 degrees and translates
2 mm One legged Stance: • 2.6 mm vertically • 1.3 mm sagittally Walking: • Pubic symphysis pistons • 2.2 mm vertically • 1.3 mm sagittally
Walheim et al. Mobility of the pubic symphysis : in vivo measurements with an electromechanic method and a roentgen stereophotogrammetric method. Clin Orthop. 1984; (191): 129-35.
(Presswood et al. Strength Cond J. 2008)
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
17
Passive Physiological Movement
Top leg flexed and knee in clinician anterior hip
• What is innominate motion? • What is sacral motion? • Look for concordant pain
Top leg extended and supported
Palpation
• Useful for Extraarticular disorders Berthelot et al. Provocative sacroiliac joint maneuvers and sacroiliac joint block are unreliable for diagnosing sacroiliacjoint pain. Joint Bone Spine. 2006 Jan; 73(1): 17-23
• Useful to implicate the long dorsal ligament Vleeming et al. Possible role of the long dorsal sacroiliac ligament in women with peripartum pelvic pain. Acta Obstet Scan. 2002;81(5):430-6
Rule OUT Hip
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
18
Fracture
52
Patellar Pubic Percussion (PPP) Test
• A stethoscope is placed on the pubic bone while the examiner either taps or places a tuning fork on the patella
SN 95; SP 86
LR+ 6.11; LR- .07
R/O femoral neck fracture
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Test, authors SN/SP LR+/LR- QUADAS Criterion
Adams &
Yarnold
94/95
20.4/0.06
8
Radiography
Bache & Cross 91/82 5.1/0.11 8 Radiography
Tiru et al 96/86 6.7/0.75 10 Radiography, bone
scintigraphy, MRI or CT
Meta-analysis revealed a pooled sensitivity of 95% and a specificity of 86%
54
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
19
Stress Fx. (Fulcrum) Test
Clinician places one forearm under patient’s thigh to be tested. Clinician’s other hand a downward pressure is applied to the proximal knee. Assessment: Test is considered (+) if the patient reports pain with the maneuver. Special Note: Confirmation of a stress fracture requires a bone scan, therefore a positive finding warrants physician referral.
R/O femoral stress fracture
55
Stress Fx. (Fulcrum) Test
Johnson et al
(1994)
7 college-aged athletes with
proximal 1/3 femoral shaft stress
fracture
93/75
3.7/0.09
5
Scintogram or
Radiography
Kang et al
(2005)
6 female Lacrosse players with
femoral shaft stress fracture; age
range of 19-23 years
88/13
1.0/0.92 7 Radiography,
bone scan
and/or MRI
Test, authors Sample size SN/SP LR+/LR
-
QUADAS Criterion
standard
56
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Posterior Pelvic Palpation
McCormick
et al (2003)
98/94 16.3/0.02 7 CT scan
Test, authors SN/SP LR+/LR- QUADAS Criterion
57
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
20
Intra-Articular Pathology
58
Scour Test – R/O:R/I ?
• Traditionally considered test of hip Intra-articular pathology • 2 arcs without, then 2 with longitudinal compression
loading • No diagnostic values
– Variations of testing, naming, etc.
59
FABER’s Test (Patrick’s Test; Figure-Four Test)
Hip joint is passively externally rotated and abducted by placing pressure over the ipsilateral knee, while stabilizing the contralateral innominate. Assessment: is of quantity and quality of motion, as well as for pain. ROM measurement can be taken in reference to the horizontal plane of the table.
60
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
21
Authors Subjects SN/SP LR+/LR- QUADAS Criterion standard
Maslowski
et al (2010)
50 subjects with signs/symptoms
suggestive of hip pathology;
mean age: 60.2 years, 30 females
81/25 1.1/0.72 7 ≥ 80% improvement on
visual analog scale after
intra-articular hip injection
Martin et al
(2008)
105 subjects with hip pain; mean
age 42±15 years, 24 females
60/18 0.73/2.2 9 MRA; anesthetic intra-
articular injection
Troelsen et
al (2009)
18 subjects with previous
periacetabular osteotomy (17 had
labral tear); median age 43 years
(32-56 years), 16 females
42/75 1.7/0.77 9
MRA
61
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Hip Osteoarthritis
62
Hip ROM
• Restriction in any single hip motion (flexion, ER, or IR):
Sensitivity = 86% Specificity = 54%
• (+) LR = 1.9 for mild to moderate radiographic arthritis.
• Limited IR ROM was found to be most predictive finding of mild to moderate OA, with
(+) LR = 3.6
Birrell F, et al. Predicting radiographic hip osteoarthritis from range of movement. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2001;40:5-6=512.
“Gold Standard” • Individuals with hip pain and hip IR
ROM ≤ 150 who experienced pain with IR, had morning stiffness ≤ 60 minutes, and were 50 y.o. or older could be identified as having hip OA
Sensitivity = 86%; specificity = 75% • If hip IR ROM was < 150 and hip
flexion ≤ 1150
Sensitivity = 86%; specificity = 75% Altman R, et al. The American College of Rheumatology criteria for classification and reporting of osteoarthritis of the hip. Arthritis Rheum. 1991;34:505-514.
63
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
22
Hip Impingement/Labral Tear
64
Subjective history
• 96% (Keeney et al. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004) and 100% (McCarthy and Busconi, 1998) of individuals with arthroscopically identified labral tear reported groin pain
65
“C” – Sign
66
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
23
Martin RL, et al. Acetabular labral tears of the hip: examination and diagnostic challenges. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2006;36(7):503-515.
Authors Findings
Keeney et al. 2004 •Groin pain most common location (96%), anterior hip (35%), lateral hip (38%), buttock (17%) •Presence of locking or catching may not be sensitive (58% reported hip locking or catching)
McCarthy & Busconi, 1995 •Groin pain may indicate not only labral tear, but presence of intra-articular pathologies in general (100% with labral tear reported it, 98% with intra-articular pathology reported it) •Inguinal clicking & giving way correlated (r = 0.79) with labral tear
Narvani et al. 2003 •Presence or absence of clicking in hip my provide useful diagnostic information •Clicking in hip had 100% sensitivity, 85% specificity and (+) LR of 6.67 for labral tear
67
Flexion Adduction Internal Rotation Test (FADDIR) • The patient is supine. The
examiner moves the patient’s leg into the combined motions of flexion, adduction, and internal rotation
SN 96 to 100
Ito K, Leunig M, Ganz R. Histopathologic features of the acetabular labrum in femoroacetabular impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004(429):262-271. Sink EL, Gralla J, Ryba A, Dayton M. Clinical presentation of femoroacetabular impingement in adolescents. J Pediatr Orthop. 2008;28(8):806-811.
68
FADDIR Test
• Multiple studies
– Most are case cohorts
– High SN, poor SP
– Highest LR+ = 2.4
– Lowest LR- = 0.2
Troelsen A, Mechlenburg I, Gelineck J, Bolvig L, Jacobsen S, Soballe K. What is the role of clinical tests and ultrasound in acetabular labral tear diagnostics? Acta Orthop. 2009;80(3):314-8.
Keeney JA, Peelle MW, Jackson J, Rubin D, Maloney WJ, Clohisy JC. Magnetic resonance arthrography versus arthroscopy in the evaluation of articular hip pathology. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Dec(429):163-9.
69
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
24
Flexion-Internal Rotation Test
Movement: Combined motions of flexion to 900 and IR are performed as shown. Assessment: As with impingement test, pain in groin is indicative of labral degeneration, fraying, or tearing.
70
Flexion-IR Test
71
Number of studies/sample size
SN SP LR + LR-
3 studies/ 42 total subjects
96 17 1.12 0.27
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Internal Rotation-Flexion-Axial Compression Test
Movement: Combined motions of flexion, IR, and axial compression are performed as shown. Assessment: Reproduction of concordant pain, locking, clicking, catching
72
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
25
Internal Rotation-Flexion-Axial Compression Test
Narvani et al
(2003)
18 athletic
subjects with
complaints of
groin pain;
mean age of
30.5±8.5
years, 5
females
75/43 1.3/0.58 8 MRA
Test, authors Subjects Sensitivity/
specificity
LR+/LR- QUADAS score Criterion standard
73
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Thomas Test
Patient holds leg not being tested in a flexed position. Clinician: Extends leg being tested.
Special note: Examiner can use proximal hand to monitor lumbar spine position. Lumbar spine should maintain contact with table.
Assessment: • If less than 0 degrees of hip extension is achieved - indicates a
tight iliopsoas. Simultaneous extension of the knee during this maneuver indicates tightness of the rectus femoris.
• Knee flexion: If less than 80 degrees is available, the rectus femoris is tight. (Kendall et al. 2005)
74
Thomas Test
McCarthy &
Busconi
(1995)
59 subjects with
refractory hip pain (35
had labral tear); mean
age: 37 years, 32
females
89/92 11.1/0.12 10 Arthroscopy
Test, authors Subjects Sensitivity/
specificity
LR+/LR- QUADAS
score
Criterion standard
75
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
26
Avascular Necrosis
76
Avascular Necrosis
Joe et al (2002)
(extension < 15
degrees)
176 HIV infected subjects;
no demographic
information reported
19/92
2.38/0.88
Joe et al (external
rotation < 60 degrees)
38/73
0.48/0.85
Joe et al (pain with
internal rotation)
13/86 0.93/1.01
Test, authors Subjects Sensitivity/
specificity
LR+/LR- QUADAS
score
Criterion
standard
10
MRI
77
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Gluteal Tendinopathy
78
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
27
Trendelenburg’s Sign • The patient stands in front of
the examiner. • The examiner instructs the
patient to stand on one leg. • The examiner evaluates the
degree of drop of the contralateral pelvis once the leg is lifted.
• Confirmation of abnormal pelvic drop is required during gait.
• A positive test is identified by an asymmetric drop of one hip compared to the other during single stance.
79
(Presswood et al. Strength Cond J. 2008)
Trendelenburg’s Sign
Bird et al (2001) 24 subjects with clinical features consistent
with greater trochanteric pain syndrome;
median age 58 years, range 36-75 years, all
subjects were female
73/77 3.15/0.35 10 MRI
Woodley et al
(2008)
40 patients with unilateral lateral hip pain;
mean age: 54.4±9.5 years, 37 females and 3
males
23/94 3.6/0.82 12 MRI
Lequesne et al
(2008)
17 patients with refractory greater trochanteric
pain syndrome; mean age: 68.1±10.8 years, 16
females and 1 male
97/96 24.3/0.03 10 MRI/Surgery
Test, authors Subjects Sensitivity/
specificity
LR+/LR- QUADAS
score
Criterion
standard
80
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Modified Trendelenburg Test
1 The patient starts in the standing position, while gently holding onto examiner. 2 The patient lifts the non-tested lower extremity off the ground and stands on the tested lower extremity for 30 seconds. 3 No lateral deviation of trunk to ipsilateral side is allowed. 4 The patient is asked whether any concordant pain occurred. 5 Pain similar to spontaneous pain is recorded as immediate, early, or late if it occurred after 0–5 seconds, 6–15 seconds, or 16–30 seconds, respectively.
81
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
28
Trendelenburg
82
Number of studies/sample size
SN SP LR + LR-
3 studies/ 78 total subjects
61 92 6.83 0.25
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Resisted Hip Abduction
• The patient is placed in a sidelying position. • The examiner instructs the patient to abduct the leg to
45 degrees. • The examiner applies force, resisting hip abduction
against the leg. • A positive test is replication of symptoms during the
testing.
83
Resisted Hip Abduction
Bird et al
(2001)
24 subjects with clinical features
consistent with greater trochanteric
pain syndrome; median age 58 years,
range 36-75 years, all female
73/46 1.35/0.59 10 MRI
Lequesne
et al
(2008)
17 patients with refractory greater
trochanteric pain syndrome; mean
age: 68.1±10.8 years, 16 females
71/97 23.7/0.30 10 MRI/
Surgery
Subjects Sensitivity/
specificity
LR+/LR- QUADAS
score
Criterion
standard
84
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
29
Resisted Hip Abduction
85
Number of studies/sample size
SN SP LR + LR-
2 studies/ 58 total subjects
71 84 6.83 0.25
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Resisted External Derotation Test • The patient lies supine, with hip
and knee flexed at 90 degrees, hip in external rotation.
• The examiner slightly diminishes the external rotation just enough to relieve the pain (if any was present).
• The patient then actively returns the lower extremity to neutral rotation (place the lower extremity along the axis of the bed) against resistance.
• The test was considered positive if spontaneous pain was reproduced. • If the result was negative, the test was repeated with the patient lying
prone, hip extended and knee flexed at 90 degrees.
86
Lequesne et al. Arthritis & Rheumatism 2008
Resisted External Derotation Test
Lequesne et
al (2008)
17 patients with refractory
greater trochanteric pain
syndrome; mean age:
68.1±10.8 years, 16 females
88/97.3 32.6/0.12 10 MRI
Test, authors Subjects Sensitivity/
specificity
LR+/LR- QUADAS
score
Criterion
standard
87
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
30
Sports Related Chronic Groin Pain
88
Single Adductor Test
• The patient is supine, hip flexed to 30 degrees, and the other leg at 0 degrees on the table.
• Patient resists the clinicians attempt to abduct the leg to be tested, effectively contracting their adductor muscle on that side.
• Assessment was made for the presence or absence of pain in the pubic bone/adductor region.
• The other side was then tested. 89
Squeeze Test
• The clenched fist of the examiner is placed between the patient’s legs at the level of the knees with approximately 45 degrees of bilateral hip flexion and 90 degrees of knee flexion (heels flat on bed surface, in supine hooklying position).
• The patient is then asked to contract maximally both adductor muscles simultaneously to ‘‘squeeze the fist’’ effectively.
90
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
31
Bilateral Adductor Test
• The patient is supine with bilateral legs raised off the table (approximately 30 degrees of hip flexion) with slight hip abduction and leg internal rotation.
• The examiner then attempts to perform bilateral hip abduction, requiring resisting this movement, thereby effectively contracting both adductor muscles simultaneously. 91
Test, authors Sample size Sensitivity/
specificity
LR+/LR- QUADAS
score
Criterion
standard
Single Adductor Test
Verrall et al
(2005)
89 Australian Rules football
players; 47 with chronic groin
pain; all were male
30/91 3.3/0.66 7
MRI (bone
marrow
edema)
Squeeze Test
Verrall et al
(2005)
43/91 4.8/0.63
Bilateral Adductor Test
Verrall et al
(2005)
54/93 7.7/0.49
92
Reiman MP, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests of the hip: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2012
Test of General Ligament Laxity
93
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
32
Dial Test
Assessment: Evaluate side-to-side ROM differences and clicking. A negative Dial test constitutes external rotation of the lower limb less than 45°, as measured vertically, with a firm endpoint. Patients with passive ER greater than 45° are considered to have a positive Dial test.
Movement: With the hip in a neutral flexion/extension and abduction/adduction position, the clinician grasps the patient’s LE at the femur and tibia and is passively rolled into full IR.
The LE is released and allowed to ER.
94
Log Roll Test
With the hip in a neutral flexion/extension and abduction/adduction position, the patient’s LE is passively rolled into full IR and ER. Assessment: Evaluate side-to-side ROM differences and clicking. A click reproduced during the test is suggestive of labral tear, while increased ER ROM may indicate iliofemoral ligament laxity.
95
Function
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission
33
Conclusion
• Lumbar spine – Pelvis – Hip
• Entire exam
– Subjective, observation, triage, myotomes/dermatomes
• R/O vs R/I
• Function Assessment
– Why is the patient seeing you?
• Assess – Re-assess
97
Thank You! [email protected]
Property of Michael Reiman, PT; please do not reproduce without permission