A comparison of manual diagnosis with a diagnosis established by a uni-level lumbar anaesthetic block procedure
A comparison of manual diagnosis with a diagnosis established by a uni-level lumbar anaesthetic block procedure
SUMMARY. The study was designed to test if a manipulative therapist (MT) using manual examination techniques alone or when accompanied by a verbal response from the subject as to the pain produced, could diagnose the lumbar segmental level responsible for a subjects low back pain and referred pain. The study consisted of prospective and retrospective parts where the MTs manual diagnosis of the symptomatic lumbar segmental level was compared to a segmental level diagnosis attained by subsequent or previous spinal anaesthetic blocks. In the prospective part of the study the MT's manual diagnosis was 94.12% and 52.9% sensitive in detecting the symptomatic lumbar segmental level with verbal and non-verbal subject responses, respectively. In the retrospective part of the study the MTs manual diagnosis was found to be 60.86% and 47.82% sensitive in detecting the symptomatic lumbar segmental level with verbal and non-verbal subject responses, respectively. In the prospective study the MT's manual diagnosis showed 100% and 80% specificity in detecting subjects with no history of low back pain with verbal and non-verbal subject responses, respectively, and 100% and 75% specificity in the retrospective study with verbal and non-verbal subject responses, respectively. Inter-therapist reliability analysis for the recording of passive physiological intervertebral movements (PPIVMs), passive accessory intervertebral movements (PAIVMs) and ‘tissue response’ showed percentage agreement rates ranging from 55% to 99%; 74% to 100% and 43% to 100%, respectively, with weighted kappa values ranging from ?0.11 to 0.32; ?0.15 to 0.24 and kappa values ranging from -0.16 to 0.28, respectively. This study demonstrates that a MT's manual examination when accompanied by a verbal subject response, is highly accurate in detecting the lumbar segmental level responsible for a subjects complaint.
82-87
Phillips, Dean
0294b4eb-9f6d-4033-ba65-9e245c96fdca
Twomey, Lance
6f58f9c7-a15f-4e05-b354-828fad18c4b3
March 1996
Phillips, Dean
0294b4eb-9f6d-4033-ba65-9e245c96fdca
Twomey, Lance
6f58f9c7-a15f-4e05-b354-828fad18c4b3
Phillips, Dean and Twomey, Lance
(1996)
A comparison of manual diagnosis with a diagnosis established by a uni-level lumbar anaesthetic block procedure.
Manual Therapy, 1 (2), .
(doi:10.1054/math.1996.0254).
(PMID:11386842)
Abstract
SUMMARY. The study was designed to test if a manipulative therapist (MT) using manual examination techniques alone or when accompanied by a verbal response from the subject as to the pain produced, could diagnose the lumbar segmental level responsible for a subjects low back pain and referred pain. The study consisted of prospective and retrospective parts where the MTs manual diagnosis of the symptomatic lumbar segmental level was compared to a segmental level diagnosis attained by subsequent or previous spinal anaesthetic blocks. In the prospective part of the study the MT's manual diagnosis was 94.12% and 52.9% sensitive in detecting the symptomatic lumbar segmental level with verbal and non-verbal subject responses, respectively. In the retrospective part of the study the MTs manual diagnosis was found to be 60.86% and 47.82% sensitive in detecting the symptomatic lumbar segmental level with verbal and non-verbal subject responses, respectively. In the prospective study the MT's manual diagnosis showed 100% and 80% specificity in detecting subjects with no history of low back pain with verbal and non-verbal subject responses, respectively, and 100% and 75% specificity in the retrospective study with verbal and non-verbal subject responses, respectively. Inter-therapist reliability analysis for the recording of passive physiological intervertebral movements (PPIVMs), passive accessory intervertebral movements (PAIVMs) and ‘tissue response’ showed percentage agreement rates ranging from 55% to 99%; 74% to 100% and 43% to 100%, respectively, with weighted kappa values ranging from ?0.11 to 0.32; ?0.15 to 0.24 and kappa values ranging from -0.16 to 0.28, respectively. This study demonstrates that a MT's manual examination when accompanied by a verbal subject response, is highly accurate in detecting the lumbar segmental level responsible for a subjects complaint.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: March 1996
Organisations:
Faculty of Medicine
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 400733
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/400733
ISSN: 1356-689X
PURE UUID: c30cb706-9e3f-43dc-af55-b7be3015ede2
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 23 Sep 2016 10:49
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 02:49
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Lance Twomey
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics