Spine Unit, Department of Orthopedics, Assaf Harofeh Medical Center, Zerifin, Israel.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Sep;470(9):2566-72. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2492-3. Epub 2012 Jul 18.
A diagnosis of cervical radiculopathy is based largely on clinical examination, including provocative testing. The most common maneuver was described in 1944 by Spurling and Scoville. Since then, several modifications of the original maneuver have been proposed to improve its value in the diagnosis of cervical radiculopathy.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We assessed the ability of six known variations of the Spurling test to reproduce the complaints of patients diagnosed with cervical radiculopathy.
We prospectively enrolled 67 patients presenting with cervical radicular-like symptoms and concordant radiographic findings. Each patient underwent six distinct provocative cervical spine maneuvers by two examiners, during which three parameters were recorded: (1) pain intensity (VAS score), (2) paresthesia intensity (0 - no paresthesia, 1 - mild to moderate, and 2 - severe), and (3) characteristic pain distribution (0 - no pain, 1 - neck pain only, 2 - arm pain only, 3 - pain elicited distal to the elbow). The interobserver reliability of the reported VAS score (measured by the intraclass coefficient correlation) ranged from 0.78 to 0.96 and the calculated kappa values of the categorical parameters ranged from 0.58 to 1.0 for paresthesia intensity and from 0.63 to 1.0 for pain distribution. Differences in scores elicited between the two examiners for the 67 patients were resolved by consensus.
A maneuver consisting of extension, lateral bending, and axial compression resulted in the highest VAS score (mean, 7) and was associated with the most distally elicited pain on average (mean, 2.5). The highest paresthesia levels were reported after applying extension, rotation, and axial compression (mean, 1). These maneuvers, however, were the least tolerable, causing discontinuation of the examination on three occasions.
Whenever cervical radiculopathy is suspected our observations suggest the staged provocative maneuvers that should be included in the physical evaluation are extension and lateral bending first, followed by the addition of axial compression in cases with an inconclusive effect.
颈椎神经根病的诊断主要基于临床检查,包括激发试验。最常见的手法是 1944 年由 Spurling 和 Scoville 描述的。从那时起,已经提出了几种原始手法的修改版本,以提高其在颈椎神经根病诊断中的价值。
问题/目的:我们评估了六种已知的 Spurling 试验变体复制诊断为颈椎神经根病患者的症状的能力。
我们前瞻性地招募了 67 名有颈椎神经根样症状和一致的影像学发现的患者。每位患者由两名检查者进行六种不同的激发颈椎运动,在此过程中记录了三个参数:(1)疼痛强度(VAS 评分),(2)感觉异常强度(0-无感觉异常,1-轻度至中度,2-重度),(3)特征性疼痛分布(0-无疼痛,1-颈部疼痛仅,2-手臂疼痛仅,3-疼痛在肘部以下引发)。报告的 VAS 评分的观察者间可靠性(通过组内相关系数测量)范围为 0.78 至 0.96,并且分类参数的计算kappa 值范围为 0.58 至 1.0 用于感觉异常强度,从 0.63 到 1.0 用于疼痛分布。对 67 名患者由两名检查者进行的评分差异通过共识解决。
由伸展、侧屈和轴向压缩组成的手法导致最高的 VAS 评分(平均值为 7),并且平均引起最远端的疼痛(平均值为 2.5)。报告的最高感觉异常水平是在施加伸展、旋转和轴向压缩后(平均值为 1)。然而,这些手法最难以忍受,导致检查在三个场合被中断。
每当怀疑颈椎神经根病时,我们的观察结果表明,物理评估中应包括的逐步激发试验是首先伸展和侧屈,然后在效果不确定的情况下增加轴向压缩。