De Hertogh Willem J, Vaes Peter H, Vijverman Veerle, De Cordt Ann, Duquet William
Faculty of Physical Education and Physical Therapy, Department of KINE, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, 1090 Brussel, Belgium.
Man Ther. 2007 Feb;12(1):50-5. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2006.02.007.
We evaluated whether a blinded observer could identify the neck pain patients in a sample of 42 subjects consisting of neck pain patients and asymptomatic controls.The allocation of subjects to either the control or patient group was based on the scoring of a VAS scale for pain intensity, a Bournemouth Questionnaire (BQ), a manual examination of the rotation of C0-2-7 (rated for Range Of Motion, end feel, onset of pain), an adapted Spurling test and Cervical Range Of Motion (CROM) measurements.The VAS and BQ resulted in a high % of correct allocations (>/= 77.5%) and a high specificity (90.9%). The Manual Examination Procedures (MEPs) have similar results especially when clustered. The combination of the VAS score, BQ and MEPs resulted in a sensitivity and specificity of 100% and 86.4%, respectively. Except for the flexion movement all CROM allocation percentages are around 50%, indicating a lesser diagnostic value.Our findings reinforce the validity of MEPs. Clustering pain measurements, BQ and MEPs provides the highest diagnostic value to identify neck pain patients or necks in need of treatment.
我们评估了一名不知情的观察者能否在由颈部疼痛患者和无症状对照者组成的42名受试者样本中识别出颈部疼痛患者。将受试者分配到对照组或患者组是基于疼痛强度视觉模拟评分量表（VAS）、伯恩茅斯问卷（BQ）、对C0 - 2 - 7旋转的手动检查（根据活动范围、终末感觉、疼痛发作进行评分）、改良斯普林试验以及颈椎活动范围（CROM）测量结果。VAS和BQ得出了较高的正确分配百分比（≥77.5%）以及较高的特异性（90.9%）。手动检查程序（MEPs）有类似结果，尤其是聚类时。VAS评分、BQ和MEPs相结合，敏感性和特异性分别为100%和86.4%。除了屈曲运动外，所有CROM分配百分比均在50%左右，表明诊断价值较低。我们的研究结果强化了MEPs的有效性。将疼痛测量、BQ和MEPs聚类可为识别颈部疼痛患者或需要治疗的颈部提供最高的诊断价值。
