Previous systematic reviews revealed poor reliability and validity for SIJ testing.
However, these reviews were published nearly 20 years ago and recent evidence has not yet been summarized.
Klerx et al (2019), conducted an up-to-date systematic review to verify whether clinical recommendations for SIJ mobility tests should be revised. .
12 relevant articles.
3 of sufficient methodological quality. .
These 3 evaluated the reliability of 8 SIJ mobility tests and one test cluster. .
(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
Gillet was the only test evaluated in more than one study.
Majority of individual tests showed slight to fair agreement in inter-tester reliability.
Compared to individual tests, the test cluster showed higher reliability, the highest in two positive tests. .
Although some tests had higher reliability, the confidence intervals around them were large. .
Furthermore, there were no validity studies of sufficient methodological quality. .
There is no new evidence for the validity of SIJ mobility tests when considering literature of at least fair methodological quality. .
Only low quality and conflicting evidence for inter-rater reliability exists.
Reliability of individual SIJ mobility tests and test clusters is questionable or uncertain. .
The use of SIJ mobility tests in clinical practice is problematic. .
Thoughts? Questions? Comments?
Write them below. .
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