Diagnostic accuracy of clinical, radiological and device-driven tests for the detection of First Ray Instability: A systematic review

Q2 Health Professions Foot Pub Date : 2024-03-11 DOI:10.1016/j.foot.2024.102080
Georgios Solomou , Andrey Bilyy , Pranav Tadikonda , Brian Gurdas , Chandra Pasapula
{"title":"Diagnostic accuracy of clinical, radiological and device-driven tests for the detection of First Ray Instability: A systematic review","authors":"Georgios Solomou ,&nbsp;Andrey Bilyy ,&nbsp;Pranav Tadikonda ,&nbsp;Brian Gurdas ,&nbsp;Chandra Pasapula","doi":"10.1016/j.foot.2024.102080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>First Ray Instability (FRI) and especially hypermobility leads to the collapse of the medial longitudinal arch's structural framework, which reduces the foot's ability to become a rigid lever for propulsion, resulting in progressive foot deformities. Early detection of FRI with prompt intervention helps prevent degenerative foot deformities. Various manual, device-based and radiographic diagnostic tests for FRI quantification have been described in the literature. We aim to conduct an up-to-date, comprehensive, systematic review of the literature reporting on diagnostic tests to evaluate FRI.</p></div><div><h3>Methodology</h3><p>Electronic databases (Medline, Embase and PubMed) and bibliography lists were searched until May 2021 for studies evaluating diagnostic tests for FRI. MeSH terms were used to conduct the literature search. The authors screened all produced abstracts. Selected articles were further assessed in full based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The relevant studies were qualitatively assessed and grouped into tables based on tests.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>18,176 studies were identified. Thirty-two full-text articles were included for assessment. Ten articles were excluded based on evaluation criteria. 18 studies were included for qualitative assessment: two studies describing manual diagnostic tests, three evaluating device-driven tests, six image-guided studies and seven comparison studies assessing a new test versus an established one.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Gold standard tests in defining FRI need to be improved. Manual tests exhibit significant subjective variability. Radiographic tests, while accurate, are complex and cumbersome to perform and, therefore, are not widely applied. Dorsal rulers have demonstrated mixed results and shown variability when compared to instruments. The focus has been on assessing FRI in hallux valgus (HV). More studies are needed to investigate FRI in the absence of HV.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12349,"journal":{"name":"Foot","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0958259224000130/pdfft?md5=a7e756e63d025545bbb665c70a32656b&pid=1-s2.0-S0958259224000130-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foot","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0958259224000130","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

First Ray Instability (FRI) and especially hypermobility leads to the collapse of the medial longitudinal arch's structural framework, which reduces the foot's ability to become a rigid lever for propulsion, resulting in progressive foot deformities. Early detection of FRI with prompt intervention helps prevent degenerative foot deformities. Various manual, device-based and radiographic diagnostic tests for FRI quantification have been described in the literature. We aim to conduct an up-to-date, comprehensive, systematic review of the literature reporting on diagnostic tests to evaluate FRI.

Methodology

Electronic databases (Medline, Embase and PubMed) and bibliography lists were searched until May 2021 for studies evaluating diagnostic tests for FRI. MeSH terms were used to conduct the literature search. The authors screened all produced abstracts. Selected articles were further assessed in full based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The relevant studies were qualitatively assessed and grouped into tables based on tests.

Results

18,176 studies were identified. Thirty-two full-text articles were included for assessment. Ten articles were excluded based on evaluation criteria. 18 studies were included for qualitative assessment: two studies describing manual diagnostic tests, three evaluating device-driven tests, six image-guided studies and seven comparison studies assessing a new test versus an established one.

Conclusion

Gold standard tests in defining FRI need to be improved. Manual tests exhibit significant subjective variability. Radiographic tests, while accurate, are complex and cumbersome to perform and, therefore, are not widely applied. Dorsal rulers have demonstrated mixed results and shown variability when compared to instruments. The focus has been on assessing FRI in hallux valgus (HV). More studies are needed to investigate FRI in the absence of HV.

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
检测第一射线不稳定性的临床、放射学和设备驱动测试的诊断准确性:系统综述。
导言:第一韧带失稳(FRI),尤其是过度活动会导致内侧纵弓的结构框架坍塌,从而降低足部作为刚性杠杆的推进能力,导致足部逐渐畸形。及早发现足弓内侧松弛症并及时干预有助于预防足部退行性畸形。文献中描述了各种用于量化 FRI 的人工、设备和放射诊断测试。我们旨在对有关 FRI 评估诊断测试的文献进行一次最新、全面、系统的回顾:我们检索了电子数据库(Medline、Embase 和 PubMed)和书目列表,以了解截至 2021 年 5 月有关 FRI 诊断测试评估的研究。文献检索使用了MeSH术语。作者筛选了所有产生的摘要。根据纳入和排除标准对所选文章进行了进一步的全面评估。对相关研究进行了定性评估,并根据测试结果将其归入表格:结果:共确定了 18 176 项研究。共纳入 32 篇全文文章进行评估。根据评估标准排除了 10 篇文章。18项研究被纳入定性评估:2项研究描述了人工诊断测试,3项评估了设备驱动测试,6项图像引导研究,7项对比研究评估了新测试和已建立的测试:结论:定义 FRI 的金标准测试需要改进。人工检测具有明显的主观差异性。X光检查虽然准确,但操作复杂繁琐,因此没有得到广泛应用。背尺显示的结果不一,与仪器相比也存在差异。目前的重点是评估拇指外翻(HV)的 FRI。还需要更多的研究来调查无 HV 时的 FRI。
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
Foot
Foot Health Professions-Podiatry
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: The Foot is an international peer-reviewed journal covering all aspects of scientific approaches and medical and surgical treatment of the foot. The Foot aims to provide a multidisciplinary platform for all specialties involved in treating disorders of the foot. At present it is the only journal which provides this inter-disciplinary opportunity. Primary research papers cover a wide range of disorders of the foot and their treatment, including diabetes, vascular disease, neurological, dermatological and infectious conditions, sports injuries, biomechanics, bioengineering, orthoses and prostheses.
期刊最新文献
The effectiveness of custom hard-shell 3D-printed foot orthoses in a cohort of patients who did not respond to treatment with custom ethylene-vinyl-acetate (EVA) foot orthoses Regional changes in the free Achilles tendon volume in response to repeated submaximal contractions Mechanical drivers of intrinsic foot muscle for maximum toe flexor strength in upright standing across different body size Accuracy and reliability of the Ipswich touch test in identifying loss of protective sensation among diabetic patients Predictors of poor pre-operative patient reported outcome measures in elective foot and ankle surgery: Analysis of 1217 patients
×
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