Mannello D M
Research Division, Logan College of Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO 63006-1065.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1992 Nov-Dec;15(9):576-90.
The (Pacific) Consortium for Chiropractic Research has taken the initiative to research, investigate and provide information directed toward health care accountability, including evaluation of health care measures and practices. This article is a review of the literature pertaining to leg length inequality (LLI). Leg length measures are utilized by various health care providers as an indicator of biomechanical imbalance and necessity for care. Following the overview of the incidence, classifications and clinical significance, emphasis was placed on methods of evaluation, especially the visual "quick" leg length measurement procedure. Finally, a brief section on conservative care has been provided.
The information and studies reviewed were obtained from Medline, the Index to Chiropractic Literature, Chiropractic Research Archives Collection, Physiotherapy Index, Chiropractic Literature Analysis and Retrieval System, various technique manuals, personal communication with technique research advisors, proceedings and dissertations. REFERENCE SELECTION: In spite of the widespread use of leg length measures, there is still much controversy associated with LLI, its biomechanical significance and the reliability of the various measurement systems employed. Therefore, the 182 references utilized were selected on the basis of applicable information, especially studies that provided a detailed methodological design with statistical analysis regarding evaluation procedures.
There appears to be a lack of agreement concerning incidence, classification and point of clinical significance. However, the manifestations or consequences of LLI demonstrate greater accordance. Of the three most commonly utilized evaluation methods, radiographic measures such as the scanograms are recognized as the most reliable procedure for the evaluation of anatomical LLI. Much controversy exists with some of the clinical orthopedic methods and the visual "quick" leg check. Because there is such a vast range in estimates of reliability, few if any definitive conclusions can be made regarding these methods. Given this, it is evident that more research is needed before the use of certain orthopedic and visual checks are considered reliable and valid.
（太平洋）脊椎按摩疗法研究联盟主动开展研究、调查并提供有关医疗保健问责制的信息，包括对医疗保健措施和实践的评估。本文是一篇关于腿长不等（LLI）的文献综述。腿长测量被各种医疗保健提供者用作生物力学失衡和护理必要性的指标。在概述发病率、分类和临床意义之后，重点放在评估方法上，尤其是视觉“快速”腿长测量程序。最后，提供了关于保守治疗的简短章节。
所审查的信息和研究来自医学文献数据库（Medline）、脊椎按摩疗法文献索引、脊椎按摩疗法研究档案库、物理治疗索引、脊椎按摩疗法文献分析与检索系统、各种技术手册、与技术研究顾问的个人交流、会议记录和论文。
尽管腿长测量被广泛使用，但关于LLI、其生物力学意义以及所采用的各种测量系统的可靠性仍存在很多争议。因此，所使用的182篇参考文献是根据适用信息选择的，特别是那些提供了详细方法设计并对评估程序进行统计分析的研究。
关于发病率、分类和临床意义点似乎缺乏共识。然而，LLI的表现或后果显示出更大的一致性。在三种最常用的评估方法中，诸如扫描图等放射学测量被认为是评估解剖学LLI最可靠的程序。一些临床骨科方法和视觉“快速”腿部检查存在很多争议。由于可靠性估计范围如此之广，关于这些方法几乎无法得出任何明确结论。鉴于此，很明显在某些骨科和视觉检查被认为可靠和有效之前，还需要更多的研究。
