Clare Helen A, Adams Roger, Maher Christopher G
School of Physiotherapy, The University of Sydney, 2141, Australia.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2005 Feb;28(2):122-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2005.01.003.
In the McKenzie system, patients are classified first into syndromes, then into subsyndromes. At present, the reliability of classification with this system is unclear. No study has included patients with cervical pain, and the studies to date have reported conflicting results.
The aim of the study is to investigate the interexaminer reliability of the McKenzie classification system for patients with cervical or lumbar pain.
Fifty patients with spinal pain (25 with lumbar pain and 25 with cervical pain) were included in the study.
The patients were assessed simultaneously by 2 physical therapists (14 in total) trained in the McKenzie method. Agreement was expressed using the multirater kappa coefficient and percent agreement for classification into (i) syndromes and (ii) subsyndromes.
The reliability for syndrome classification was kappa = 0.84 with 96% agreement for the total patient pool, kappa = 1.0 with 100% agreement for lumbar patients, and kappa = 0.63 with 92% agreement for cervical patients. The reliability for subsyndrome classification was kappa = 0.87 with 90% agreement for the total patient pool, kappa = 0.89 with 92% agreement for lumbar patients, and kappa = 0.84 with 88% agreement for the cervical patients.
The McKenzie assessment performed by persons trained in the McKenzie method may allow for reliable classification of patients with lumbar and cervical pain.
在麦肯齐体系中,患者首先被分类为综合征,然后再细分为子综合征。目前,该体系分类的可靠性尚不清楚。尚无研究纳入颈部疼痛患者,且迄今为止的研究报告结果相互矛盾。
本研究旨在调查麦肯齐分类系统对颈痛或腰痛患者的检查者间可靠性。
本研究纳入了50例脊柱疼痛患者(25例腰痛患者和25例颈痛患者)。
由14名接受过麦肯齐方法培训的物理治疗师同时对患者进行评估。采用多评估者kappa系数和百分比一致性来表示对(i)综合征和(ii)子综合征分类的一致性。
综合征分类的可靠性为:总体患者kappa = 0.84,一致性为96%;腰痛患者kappa = 1.0,一致性为100%;颈痛患者kappa = 0.63,一致性为92%。子综合征分类的可靠性为:总体患者kappa = 0.87,一致性为90%;腰痛患者kappa = 0.89,一致性为92%;颈痛患者kappa = 0.84,一致性为88%。
由接受过麦肯齐方法培训的人员进行的麦肯齐评估,可能有助于对颈痛和腰痛患者进行可靠分类。