We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Inter- and Intrarater Reliability of Clinical Tests Associated With Functional Lumbar Segmental Instability and Motor Control Impairment in Patients With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review.
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2017 January
OBJECTIVES: To provide a comprehensive overview of clinical tests associated with functional lumbar segmental instability and motor control impairment in patients with low back pain (LBP), and to investigate their intrarater reliability, interrater reliability, or both.
DATA SOURCES: A systematic computerized search was conducted on December 1, 2015, in 4 different databases (starting search year is indicated in parentheses, with articles included from that year until December 1, 2015): PubMed (1972-), Web of Science (1955-), Embase (1947-), and MEDLINE (1946-).
STUDY SELECTION: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed during design, search, and reporting stages of this review. The included population comprised patients with primary LBP.
DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted as follows: (1) description and scoring of the clinical tests; (2) population characteristics; (3) inclusion and exclusion criteria; (4) description of the used procedures; (5) results for both intra- and interrater reliability; and eventually (6) notification on used statistical method. The risk of bias of the included articles was assessed with the use of the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist.
DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 16 records were eligible, and 30 clinical tests were identified. All included studies investigated interrater reliability, and 3 studies investigated intrarater reliability. The identified interrater reliability scores ranged from poor to very good (κ=-.09 to .89; intraclass correlation coefficient, .72-.96), and the intrarater reliability scores ranged from fair to very good (κ=.51-.86).
CONCLUSIONS: Three clinical tests (aberrant movement pattern, prone instability test, Beighton Scale) could be identified as having an adequate interrater reliability. No conclusions could be made for intrarater reliability. However, further research should focus on better study designs, provide an overall agreement for uniformity and interpretation of clinical tests, and should implement research regarding validity.
DATA SOURCES: A systematic computerized search was conducted on December 1, 2015, in 4 different databases (starting search year is indicated in parentheses, with articles included from that year until December 1, 2015): PubMed (1972-), Web of Science (1955-), Embase (1947-), and MEDLINE (1946-).
STUDY SELECTION: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed during design, search, and reporting stages of this review. The included population comprised patients with primary LBP.
DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted as follows: (1) description and scoring of the clinical tests; (2) population characteristics; (3) inclusion and exclusion criteria; (4) description of the used procedures; (5) results for both intra- and interrater reliability; and eventually (6) notification on used statistical method. The risk of bias of the included articles was assessed with the use of the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist.
DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 16 records were eligible, and 30 clinical tests were identified. All included studies investigated interrater reliability, and 3 studies investigated intrarater reliability. The identified interrater reliability scores ranged from poor to very good (κ=-.09 to .89; intraclass correlation coefficient, .72-.96), and the intrarater reliability scores ranged from fair to very good (κ=.51-.86).
CONCLUSIONS: Three clinical tests (aberrant movement pattern, prone instability test, Beighton Scale) could be identified as having an adequate interrater reliability. No conclusions could be made for intrarater reliability. However, further research should focus on better study designs, provide an overall agreement for uniformity and interpretation of clinical tests, and should implement research regarding validity.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app