IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i19p7046-d420043.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Use of Neurodynamic or Orthopedic Tension Tests for the Diagnosis of Lumbar and Lumbosacral Radiculopathies: Study of the Diagnostic Validity

Author

Listed:
  • Francisco Javier González Espinosa de los Monteros

    (Andalusian Health Service, Hospital “Puerta Universitario del Mar”, Av. Ana de Viya, 21, 11009 Cádiz, Spain)

  • Gloria Gonzalez-Medina

    (Nursing and Physiotherapy Department, Cadiz University, Av. Ana de Viya, 52, 11009 Cadiz, Spain)

  • Elisa Maria Garrido Ardila

    (Department of Medical-Surgical Therapy, Medicine Faculty, Extremadura University, 06006 Badajoz, Spain)

  • Juan Rodríguez Mansilla

    (Department of Medical-Surgical Therapy, Medicine Faculty, Extremadura University, 06006 Badajoz, Spain)

  • José Paz Expósito

    (Andalusian Health Service, Hospital “Puerta Universitario del Mar”, Av. Ana de Viya, 21, 11009 Cádiz, Spain)

  • Petronila Oliva Ruiz

    (Nursing and Physiotherapy Department, Cadiz University, Av. Ana de Viya, 52, 11009 Cadiz, Spain)

Abstract

Background: Lumbar radiculopathy is a nerve root disorder whose correct diagnosis is essential. The objective of the present study was to analyze the reliability diagnostic validity of eight neurodynamic and/or orthopedic tension tests using magnetic resonance imaging as the Gold Standard. Methods: An epidemiological study of randomized consecutive cases which was observational, descriptive, transversal, double blinded and was conducted following the Standards for Reporting Diagnostic accuracy studies (STARD) declaration. The sample size was 864 participants. Internal and external validity (CI = 95%) and reliability, were calculated for all tests performed independently. The diagnostic validity of the combined and multiple tests in parallel was also calculated. Results: The analysis indicated that only two tests performed independently had external validity, but neither had reliability or precision. The Straight Leg Raise test and the Bragard test performed in a multiple parallel way showed high sensitivity (97.40%), high negative predictive value (PV− 96.64%) and external validity (Likelihood Ratio− 0.05). The combined test of the Slump test and the Dejerine’s triad had internal and external validity. Conclusions: The Straight Leg Raise test and the Bragard test performed in a multiple parallel way and the combined test of the Slump Test and the Dejerine’s triad have clinical validity to discard lumbar or lumbar-sacral radiculopathy.

Suggested Citation

  • Francisco Javier González Espinosa de los Monteros & Gloria Gonzalez-Medina & Elisa Maria Garrido Ardila & Juan Rodríguez Mansilla & José Paz Expósito & Petronila Oliva Ruiz, 2020. "Use of Neurodynamic or Orthopedic Tension Tests for the Diagnosis of Lumbar and Lumbosacral Radiculopathies: Study of the Diagnostic Validity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-12, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:19:p:7046-:d:420043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/19/7046/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/19/7046/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:19:p:7046-:d:420043. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.