Accuracy of straight leg raise and slump tests in detecting lumbar disc herniation: a pilot study.

V R P M'kumbuzi, J T Ntawukuriryayo, J D Haminana, J Munyandamutsa, E Nzakizwanimana
{"title":"Accuracy of straight leg raise and slump tests in detecting lumbar disc herniation: a pilot study.","authors":"V R P M'kumbuzi,&nbsp;J T Ntawukuriryayo,&nbsp;J D Haminana,&nbsp;J Munyandamutsa,&nbsp;E Nzakizwanimana","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the accuracy of the Straight Leg Raise (SLR) and slump tests in detecting Lumbar Disc Herniation (LDH).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Two referral hospitals in Kigali, Rwanda: King Faisal Hospital and Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Kigali.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>All patients aged 18 to 70 who had an MRI and who were experiencing pain in the low back, leg or low back and leg.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Closed Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) investigations for each patient as witnessed by a radiologist who read the image were recorded by the first researcher and blinded to other researchers. The SLR and slump tests were performed three times on each patient by independent testers who were blinded to the result of the first test. The test order was randomized for each subject and the two tests were separated by one day wash-out period.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Data were analyzed using a 2x2 table to ascertain diagnostic statistics including sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty three from a possible 37 patients mean age 41.58 ± 10 years completed all of the tests. The sensitivity of SLR was greater (0.875; CI: 0.690-0.957) than that of the slump tests (0.800; CI: 0.6087-0.911) (p = 0.01) in detecting LDH. The specificity for SLR was 0.429 (CI: 0.158-0.750) and for slump was 0.714 (CI: 0.359-0.918). Substantial agreement (K = 0.774) was obtained between the SLR and MRI.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The SLR was more accurate in detecting LDH. Further validation of this pilot finding is required by studying a larger sample.</p>","PeriodicalId":74979,"journal":{"name":"The Central African journal of medicine","volume":"58 1-4","pages":"5-11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Central African journal of medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To determine the accuracy of the Straight Leg Raise (SLR) and slump tests in detecting Lumbar Disc Herniation (LDH).

Design: Cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study.

Setting: Two referral hospitals in Kigali, Rwanda: King Faisal Hospital and Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Kigali.

Subjects: All patients aged 18 to 70 who had an MRI and who were experiencing pain in the low back, leg or low back and leg.

Interventions: Closed Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) investigations for each patient as witnessed by a radiologist who read the image were recorded by the first researcher and blinded to other researchers. The SLR and slump tests were performed three times on each patient by independent testers who were blinded to the result of the first test. The test order was randomized for each subject and the two tests were separated by one day wash-out period.

Main outcome measures: Data were analyzed using a 2x2 table to ascertain diagnostic statistics including sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals.

Results: Thirty three from a possible 37 patients mean age 41.58 ± 10 years completed all of the tests. The sensitivity of SLR was greater (0.875; CI: 0.690-0.957) than that of the slump tests (0.800; CI: 0.6087-0.911) (p = 0.01) in detecting LDH. The specificity for SLR was 0.429 (CI: 0.158-0.750) and for slump was 0.714 (CI: 0.359-0.918). Substantial agreement (K = 0.774) was obtained between the SLR and MRI.

Conclusion: The SLR was more accurate in detecting LDH. Further validation of this pilot finding is required by studying a larger sample.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
直腿抬高和坍落度检测腰椎间盘突出的准确性:一项初步研究。
目的:探讨直腿抬高法(SLR)和坍落度法检测腰椎间盘突出症(LDH)的准确性。设计:横断面诊断准确性研究。环境:卢旺达基加利的两家转诊医院:费萨尔国王医院和基加利大学医院中心。研究对象:所有年龄在18岁到70岁之间,做过核磁共振检查且腰背部、腿部或腰背部和腿部疼痛的患者。干预措施:对每位患者进行封闭磁共振成像(MRI)调查,由一名放射科医生见证,该放射科医生阅读图像,由第一名研究人员记录,并对其他研究人员保密。由独立测试人员对每位患者进行三次单反和坍落度测试,他们对第一次测试的结果不知情。每个受试者的测试顺序随机化,两次测试之间间隔一天的洗脱期。主要结局指标:采用2x2表对数据进行分析,以确定诊断统计数据,包括敏感性和特异性,95%置信区间。结果:37例患者中有33例完成了所有检查,平均年龄41.58±10岁。单反的灵敏度更高(0.875;CI: 0.690-0.957)比坍落度试验(0.800;CI: 0.6087 ~ 0.911) (p = 0.01)。SLR的特异性为0.429 (CI: 0.158 ~ 0.750),坍落度的特异性为0.714 (CI: 0.359 ~ 0.918)。SLR和MRI结果基本一致(K = 0.774)。结论:单反法检测LDH更准确。需要通过研究更大的样本来进一步验证这一初步发现。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Clinical characteristics and outcome of children admitted with bronchiolitis at Sally Mugabe Hospital, Harare, Zimbabwe Investigating gains in TB detection during rollout of Genexpert MTB/Rif universal access to drug susceptibility testing algorithm in Manicaland, Zimbabwe, 2017-2018 COP27 Climate Change Conference: urgent action needed for Africa and the world Histopathological patterns in kidney biopsies in Zimbabwe: a 12-year retrospective study Clinical profiles, healthcare given and hospital outcomes of children hospitalised for acute asthma at a tertiary hospital in Harare, Zimbabwe: a 2010-2020 chart review
×
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