A perspective on the use of the cervical flexion rotation test in the physical therapy management of cervicogenic headaches.

IF 2.1 Q1 REHABILITATION Archives of physiotherapy Pub Date : 2022-12-08 DOI:10.1186/s40945-022-00153-2
Jean-Philippe Paquin, Jean-Pierre Dumas, Thomas Gérard, Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme
{"title":"A perspective on the use of the cervical flexion rotation test in the physical therapy management of cervicogenic headaches.","authors":"Jean-Philippe Paquin,&nbsp;Jean-Pierre Dumas,&nbsp;Thomas Gérard,&nbsp;Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme","doi":"10.1186/s40945-022-00153-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Cervical Flexion-Rotation Test (CFRT) is widely used in the assessment of upper cervical spine mobility impairments and in the diagnosis of cervicogenic headache (CGH) by physiotherapist. Many studies investigated its different properties, and the results show that the CFRT has good construct validity in the measurement of C1-C2 rotation as well as good to excellent reliability.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>In this theoretical paper, we explore the value and point out two methodological issues associated to the CFRT, one related to the procedures and another related to its diagnostic accuracy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analysis indicate that there are many confounding factors that could affect the CFRT cut-off's accuracy, which are likely to overestimate the diagnosis properties of CFRT. Potential solutions are discussed. Moreover, the gold standard (manual examination) used to examine the validity of the CFRT for the diagnosis of CGH appears to be far from perfect - we could argue that the diagnostic properties of the CFRT for CGH might be biased and the likelihood ratios are likely to be overestimated. However, it could be relevant to explore if results of the CFRT could be considered as a treatment-effect modifier. Maybe the CFRT could be more valuable as a prognostic factor?</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The quality of evidence supporting the validity of the CFRT is most likely biased. In the absence of a better gold standard, maybe the CFRT could be a more valuable test to establish the patient's prognosis and help the clinician to choose the most appropriate treatment options.</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"12 1","pages":"26"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9730562/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of physiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-022-00153-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: The Cervical Flexion-Rotation Test (CFRT) is widely used in the assessment of upper cervical spine mobility impairments and in the diagnosis of cervicogenic headache (CGH) by physiotherapist. Many studies investigated its different properties, and the results show that the CFRT has good construct validity in the measurement of C1-C2 rotation as well as good to excellent reliability.

Purpose: In this theoretical paper, we explore the value and point out two methodological issues associated to the CFRT, one related to the procedures and another related to its diagnostic accuracy.

Results: Our analysis indicate that there are many confounding factors that could affect the CFRT cut-off's accuracy, which are likely to overestimate the diagnosis properties of CFRT. Potential solutions are discussed. Moreover, the gold standard (manual examination) used to examine the validity of the CFRT for the diagnosis of CGH appears to be far from perfect - we could argue that the diagnostic properties of the CFRT for CGH might be biased and the likelihood ratios are likely to be overestimated. However, it could be relevant to explore if results of the CFRT could be considered as a treatment-effect modifier. Maybe the CFRT could be more valuable as a prognostic factor?

Conclusion: The quality of evidence supporting the validity of the CFRT is most likely biased. In the absence of a better gold standard, maybe the CFRT could be a more valuable test to establish the patient's prognosis and help the clinician to choose the most appropriate treatment options.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
颈椎屈曲旋转试验在颈源性头痛物理治疗中的应用。
背景:颈椎屈曲旋转试验(CFRT)被物理治疗师广泛用于评估上颈椎活动障碍和诊断颈源性头痛(CGH)。许多研究对CFRT的不同特性进行了研究,结果表明CFRT在C1-C2旋转测量中具有良好的结构效度和良好到优异的信度。目的:在这篇理论论文中,我们探讨了CFRT的价值,并指出了与CFRT相关的两个方法学问题,一个与程序有关,另一个与诊断准确性有关。结果:我们的分析表明,影响CFRT cut-off准确度的混杂因素很多,可能会高估CFRT的诊断特性。讨论了可能的解决方案。此外,用于检查CFRT诊断CGH有效性的金标准(人工检查)似乎远非完美-我们可以认为CFRT对CGH的诊断特性可能存在偏差,并且似然比可能被高估。然而,探讨CFRT的结果是否可以被视为治疗效果的调节因素可能是相关的。也许CFRT作为一种预后因素更有价值?结论:支持CFRT有效性的证据质量很可能存在偏差。在没有更好的金标准的情况下,CFRT可能是一个更有价值的测试,可以确定患者的预后,帮助临床医生选择最合适的治疗方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Indoor and outdoor 10-Meter Walk Test and Timed Up and Go in patients after total hip arthroplasty: a reliability and comparative study. Erratum in: Pragmatism in manual therapy trials for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review. Intra- and inter-rater reliability of goniometric finger range of motion using a written protocol. A decade of growth: preserving the original meaning of research for physiotherapists. Neurological conditions and community-based physical activity: physical therapists' belief and actions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1