School of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Orthopaedic Clinical Research Unit, Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital Research Center, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l'Est-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Department of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 Apr;99(4):607-614.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.10.014. Epub 2017 Nov 9.
To assess the validity of diagnostic clusters combining history elements and physical examination tests to diagnose or exclude patellofemoral pain (PFP).
Prospective diagnostic study.
Orthopedic outpatient clinics, family medicine clinics, and community-dwelling.
Consecutive patients (N=279) consulting one of the participating orthopedic surgeons (n=3) or sport medicine physicians (n=2) for any knee complaint.
Not applicable.
History elements and physical examination tests were obtained by a trained physiotherapist blinded to the reference standard: a composite diagnosis including both physical examination tests and imaging results interpretation performed by an expert physician. Penalized logistic regression (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) was used to identify history elements and physical examination tests associated with the diagnosis of PFP, and recursive partitioning was used to develop diagnostic clusters. Diagnostic accuracy measures including sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and positive and negative likelihood ratios with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.
Two hundred seventy-nine participants were evaluated, and 75 had a diagnosis of PFP (26.9%). Different combinations of history elements and physical examination tests including the age of participants, knee pain location, difficulty descending stairs, patellar facet palpation, and passive knee extension range of motion were associated with a diagnosis of PFP and used in clusters to accurately discriminate between individuals with PFP and individuals without PFP. Two diagnostic clusters developed to confirm the presence of PFP yielded a positive likelihood ratio of 8.7 (95% CI, 5.2-14.6) and 3 clusters to exclude PFP yielded a negative likelihood ratio of .12 (95% CI, .06-.27).
Diagnostic clusters combining common history elements and physical examination tests that can accurately diagnose or exclude PFP compared to various knee disorders were developed. External validation is required before clinical use.
评估结合病史元素和体格检查试验来诊断或排除髌股疼痛(PFP)的诊断簇的有效性。
前瞻性诊断研究。
骨科门诊、家庭医学诊所和社区。
连续患者(N=279)向参与的骨科外科医生(n=3)或运动医学医师(n=2)咨询任何膝关节疾病。
不适用。
由一名受过培训的物理治疗师获取病史元素和体格检查试验,该治疗师对参考标准(由专家医生进行的体格检查试验和影像学结果解释的综合诊断)不知情。使用惩罚逻辑回归(最小绝对收缩和选择算子)来识别与 PFP 诊断相关的病史元素和体格检查试验,并使用递归分区来开发诊断簇。计算诊断准确性测量指标,包括敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值以及阳性和阴性似然比及其相关的 95%置信区间(CI)。
对 279 名参与者进行了评估,其中 75 名被诊断为 PFP(26.9%)。不同的病史元素和体格检查试验组合,包括参与者的年龄、膝关节疼痛部位、下楼梯困难、髌骨面触诊和被动膝关节伸展范围,与 PFP 的诊断相关,并用于簇中,以准确区分 PFP 患者和非 PFP 患者。开发了两个用于确认 PFP 存在的诊断簇,阳性似然比为 8.7(95%CI,5.2-14.6),3 个用于排除 PFP 的簇,阴性似然比为.12(95%CI,.06-.27)。
开发了一种结合常见病史元素和体格检查试验的诊断簇,可与各种膝关节疾病相比,准确诊断或排除 PFP。在临床应用之前需要进行外部验证。