Suppr超能文献

在上肢象限神经激发试验中检测“疼痛发作”和“次最大疼痛”的可靠性。

Reliability of detecting 'onset of pain' and 'submaximal pain' during neural provocation testing of the upper quadrant.

作者信息

Coppieters Michel, Stappaerts Karel, Janssens Koen, Jull Gwendolen

机构信息

Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, University of Leuven, Belgium.

出版信息

Physiother Res Int. 2002;7(3):146-56. doi: 10.1002/pri.251.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Conflicting results have been reported with regard to the reliability of neural tissue provocation tests and it is unclear whether repeated testing affects the test results. In the present study, the stability and reliability of the occurrence of 'onset of pain' and 'submaximal pain' throughout the range of motion during neurodynamic testing was analysed, in both a laboratory and a clinical setting.

METHOD

A repeated-measures study design within and between sessions was used. In the laboratory and clinical settings, the base neurodynamic test for the median nerve was performed during a single session on a total of 27 patients with neurogenic cervico-brachial pain. In addition, the base test and three common variations were performed on two occasions by two examiners on 10 asymptomatic subjects in laboratory conditions only. Patients indicated the moment of 'submaximal pain' occurrence, whereas asymptomatic subjects indicated 'onset of pain' and 'submaximal pain'. Corresponding angles at the elbow were recorded by use of an electrogoniometer.

RESULTS

In the asymptomatic group, the intra- and inter-tester reliability within the same session was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC2.1 > or = 0.95; standard error of measurement (SEM) < or = 4.9 degrees). Reliability after a 48-hour interval was moderate (ICC2.1 > or = 0.69; SEM < or = 9.9 degrees). The reliability coefficients for the symptomatic group within the same session were comparable with the excellent results of the asymptomatic group, for both the laboratory (ICC2.1 = 0.98; SEM = 2.8 degrees) and clinical settings (ICC2.1 > or = 0.98; SEM < or = 3.4 degrees). Consequently, from a statistical perspective, improvements in range of motion as small as approximately 7.5 degrees may be interpreted meaningfully. No significant trend due to repeated testing could be observed when three consecutive repetitions were analysed.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain provocation during neurodynamic testing is a stable phenomenon and the range of elbow extension corresponding with the moment of 'pain onset' and 'submaximal pain' may be measured reliably, both in laboratory and clinical conditions.

摘要

背景与目的

关于神经组织激发试验的可靠性,已有相互矛盾的研究结果报道,且尚不清楚重复测试是否会影响测试结果。在本研究中,分析了在实验室和临床环境下,神经动力测试全过程中“疼痛发作”和“次最大疼痛”发生情况的稳定性和可靠性。

方法

采用组内和组间重复测量研究设计。在实验室和临床环境中,对总共27例神经源性颈臂痛患者在单个疗程内进行正中神经基础神经动力测试。此外,仅在实验室条件下,两名检查者对10名无症状受试者进行两次基础测试和三种常见变体测试。患者指出“次最大疼痛”出现的时刻,而无症状受试者指出“疼痛发作”和“次最大疼痛”。使用电子测角仪记录肘部相应角度。

结果

在无症状组中,同一疗程内测试者内和测试者间的可靠性极佳(组内相关系数(ICC2.1)≥0.95;测量标准误差(SEM)≤4.9度)。48小时间隔后的可靠性为中等(ICC2.1≥0.69;SEM≤9.9度)。有症状组在同一疗程内的可靠性系数与无症状组的极佳结果相当,在实验室(ICC2.1 = 0.98;SEM = 2.8度)和临床环境中(ICC2.1≥0.98;SEM≤3.4度)均如此。因此,从统计学角度来看,运动范围小至约7.5度的改善可能具有有意义的解释。分析连续三次重复时,未观察到因重复测试导致的显著趋势。

结论

神经动力测试期间的疼痛激发是一种稳定现象,在实验室和临床条件下,均可可靠测量与“疼痛发作”和“次最大疼痛”时刻相对应的肘部伸展范围。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验