Photo
@physicaltherapyresearch
877 Likes31 Comments
877 Likes31 Comments

πŸ“šπŸ”¬
SIJ Testing
ℹ️ℹ️
INTRO:
Previous systematic reviews revealed poor reliability and validity for SIJ testing.
ℹ️
However, these reviews were published nearly 20 years ago and recent evidence has not yet been summarized.
ℹ️
Klerx et al (2019), conducted an up-to-date systematic review to verify whether clinical recommendations for SIJ mobility tests should be revised. .
πŸ“ŠπŸ“Š
Results:
12 relevant articles.
3 of sufficient methodological quality. .
πŸ“Š
These 3 evaluated the reliability of 8 SIJ mobility tests and one test cluster. .
πŸ“Š
Including:
(1) Click-clack test (2) Standing flexion test
(3) Seated flexion test
(4) Gillet test
(5) Prone knee flexion test
(6) Heel-bank test
(7) Abduction test
(8) Thumb-PSIS test
πŸ“Š
Gillet was the only test evaluated in more than one study.
πŸ“Š
Majority of individual tests showed slight to fair agreement in inter-tester reliability.
πŸ“Š
Compared to individual tests, the test cluster showed higher reliability, the highest in two positive tests. .
πŸ“Š
Although some tests had higher reliability, the confidence intervals around them were large. .
πŸ“Š
Furthermore, there were no validity studies of sufficient methodological quality. .
βœ…βœ…
Conclusion: .
βœ…
There is no new evidence for the validity of SIJ mobility tests when considering literature of at least fair methodological quality. .
βœ…
Only low quality and conflicting evidence for inter-rater reliability exists.
βœ…
Reliability of individual SIJ mobility tests and test clusters is questionable or uncertain. .
βœ…
The use of SIJ mobility tests in clinical practice is problematic. .
🧠🧠
Thoughts? Questions? Comments?
🧠
Write them below. .
πŸ“šπŸ“šπŸ“š
SOURCE:
Klerx, et al. 2019. Clinimetric properties of sacroiliac joint mobility tests: A systematic review. MSK Science. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.msksp.2019.102090

19 Nov 2019

Comments
  • @noejarrand

    @_mvvvxx_ zeubi

    21 Nov 2019

  • @osteopathy4thesoul

    Where pain is does not mean it’s the source of the problem. Most likely it’s not... it’s more like: how the whole affect the SIJ? Below and above... what’s the history? Falls, accidents, trauma (physical and emotional), health of the organs within pelvic bowl, hormonal status? I mean... SIJ is one thing but how does it integrate or not? And why? Go down the rabbit hole.

    19 Nov 2019

  • @physio.guy

    @bryce_dund

    19 Nov 2019

  • @physiostrengthnyc

    The funny thing is, even if we could reliably demonstrate that the sacroiliac joint is a large source of nociception, would it drastically change the plan of care or exercise selection? πŸ€”

    19 Nov 2019

  • @nomadpt

    @reesetmj23

    19 Nov 2019

  • @atlafleur

    I could be wrong, but I don’t think the descriptions match the tests in the image. Also, what is to be said about newer studies that discredit old beliefs of the actual mobility of the SIJ? I can’t remember specifically, but I want to say that the SIJ has been observed to only have about 6Β° of mobility.

    19 Nov 2019

  • @michaelbwoodbury

    The only reliable tests for SIJ are pain provocation and feeling end-range joint play. Anything else that attempts to find more info is a fools errand IMO. Even the best motion palpators can’t tell you the millimeter or two difference to any exact degree in a β€œfixated” joint. And then we have to consider how much of that perceived dysfunction is actually lumbosacral junction vs upper SIJ. It be like that sometimes.

    19 Nov 2019

  • @fahreza_fatih

    @rizkyputrib_ @devimigieka

    19 Nov 2019

  • @physicaltherapyresearch

    #rehab #pain #painscience #physiology #physicaltherapy #physiotherapy #massage #orthopedic #chiropractic #medicine #sportsmedicine #science #research #health #wellness #nervoussystem #neuroscience #brain #physicaltherapyresearch #dpt #dptstudent #exercise #fitness #workout #sijointdysfunction #sijointpain #sij

    19 Nov 2019