Tuchin P J, Hart C J, Johnson C, Colman R, Gee A, Edwards I, Plucknett M, Bonello R
Australas Chiropr Osteopathy. 1996 Mar;5(1):23-9.
A pilot study was conducted to determine whether untrained examiners could agree on palpatory findings in the cervical spine.
Fifty-three university students, (most of whom were chiropractic students), had their cervical spines examined by seven different chiropractors using their own clinical methods, of which motion palpation was a common, but not standard component.
Chiropractic Centre in Macquarie University.
Volunteer university students.
Individual clinical methods, which included static and/or motion palpation, vertebral springing, range of motion and applied kinesiology.
Statistically, for the total group, there was poor interexaminer reliability. Of eight examiners, four did not disagree significantly, the next two examiners disagreed with each other but only at a single level and the remaining two examiners disagreed with most of the other examiners and each other.
In the cervical spine, it appears that C6 is the level of highest contention, followed by C1 and C5. Essentially the results suggest that combinations of examiners show reasonable consistency at identifying the same entity while using their own typical examination techniques. The nature of these palpable findings, leading to a diagnosis of subluxation or vertebral dysfunction is ill defined. Several issues were considered as important: expectations of examiners, research design, subject compliance, role of asymptomatic subjects and what the examiners were actually detecting.
开展一项试点研究，以确定未经培训的检查人员对颈椎触诊结果是否能达成一致。
53名大学生（其中大多数是脊椎按摩专业学生）由7位不同的脊椎按摩师采用各自的临床方法对其颈椎进行检查，其中动态触诊是常用但非标准的组成部分。
麦考瑞大学脊椎按摩中心。
志愿大学生。
个体临床方法，包括静态和/或动态触诊、椎体弹跳、活动范围和应用运动学。
从统计学角度看，就整个群体而言，检查人员之间的可靠性较差。在8名检查人员中，4名没有显著分歧，接下来的两名检查人员彼此存在分歧，但仅在单一水平上，其余两名检查人员与大多数其他检查人员以及彼此之间都存在分歧。
在颈椎方面，似乎C6是争议最大的节段，其次是C1和C5。从本质上讲，结果表明检查人员组合在使用各自典型检查技术识别同一实体时表现出合理的一致性。这些可触及发现导致半脱位或椎体功能障碍诊断的性质尚不明确。有几个问题被认为很重要：检查人员的期望、研究设计、受试者的依从性、无症状受试者的作用以及检查人员实际检测到的内容。
