The Active Straight Leg Raise test in lumbopelvic pain during pregnancy

Abstract Although many properties of the Active Straight Leg Raise (ASLR) test as a diagnostic test in lumbopelvic pain (LPP) are well documented, various elements are lacking. A cross-sectional study was performed to compute sensitivity and specificity, to assess the advantages and disadvantages of...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Manual therapy 2012-08, Vol.17 (4), p.364-368
Hauptverfasser: Mens, Jan M.A, Huis in ’t Veld, Yvonne H, Pool-Goudzwaard, Annelies
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 368
container_issue 4
container_start_page 364
container_title Manual therapy
container_volume 17
creator Mens, Jan M.A
Huis in ’t Veld, Yvonne H
Pool-Goudzwaard, Annelies
description Abstract Although many properties of the Active Straight Leg Raise (ASLR) test as a diagnostic test in lumbopelvic pain (LPP) are well documented, various elements are lacking. A cross-sectional study was performed to compute sensitivity and specificity, to assess the advantages and disadvantages of various cutoff points, to analyze the relation between the ASLR test and the Posterior Pelvic Pain Provocation (PPPP) test, and to investigate the relation with confounders. Data of 110 women with LPP and 72 without LPP were available. The advantages and disadvantages of four cutoff points of ASLR, and combinations of the ASLR and PPPP, were investigated by comparing sensitivity, specificity and area under the curves (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC). The influence of the site of pain was analyzed by means of AUC. The relation with confounders was measured using Pearson correlation coefficients. Results show that for diagnostic use the best cutoff for the ASLR test in pregnancy is between score 0 and 1. Specificity of the ASLR test is good (88%). Sensitivity for all types of LPP during pregnancy is moderate (54%), and is larger in case of more pain and disability. When combined with the PPPP test, sensitivity of the ASLR test is larger (68%). Isolated symphyseal pain, isolated low back pain and isolated coccyx pain are not diagnosed by these two tests. The ASLR test is not influenced by age, number of previous deliveries, BMI, cause of LPP (pregnancy-related or not), the existence of urinary incontinence and/or level of fatigue.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.math.2012.01.007
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1017622605</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S1356689X12000082</els_id><sourcerecordid>1017622605</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c477t-f8f885a0f9eea4fc64850573924734f12842c016f027ef8fbad5c6d42cd94c403</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kUtr3DAUhUVJaR7NH8giaJmNnStZkm0IgRCaBwwUmhSyExr5ekYTvyLZA_PvKzNJFll0pcvlOwfdcwg5Y5AyYOpyk7ZmXKccGE-BpQD5N3LEZMYTnqvyIM6ZVIkqypdDchzCBgBKAfIHOeQ8U1IU4ojcP6-R3tjRbZE-jd641XqkC1zRP8YFpCOGkbqONlO77Adsts7SwcRFNXnXrejgcdWZzu5-ku-1aQKevr8n5O_dr-fbh2Tx-_7x9maRWJHnY1IXdVFIA3WJaERtlSgkyDwrucgzUTNeCG7jbTXwHCO8NJW0qorLqhRWQHZCLva-g-_fpvg73bpgsWlMh_0UdAwmV5wrkBHle9T6PgSPtR68a43fRWjmlN7oOUA9B6iB6RhgFJ2_-0_LFqtPyUdiEbjaAxiv3Dr0OliHncXKebSjrnr3f__rL3LbuM5Z07ziDsOmn3wX89NMh6jRT3OFc4OMx_ag4Nk_NceVsw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1017622605</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Active Straight Leg Raise test in lumbopelvic pain during pregnancy</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Mens, Jan M.A ; Huis in ’t Veld, Yvonne H ; Pool-Goudzwaard, Annelies</creator><creatorcontrib>Mens, Jan M.A ; Huis in ’t Veld, Yvonne H ; Pool-Goudzwaard, Annelies</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Although many properties of the Active Straight Leg Raise (ASLR) test as a diagnostic test in lumbopelvic pain (LPP) are well documented, various elements are lacking. A cross-sectional study was performed to compute sensitivity and specificity, to assess the advantages and disadvantages of various cutoff points, to analyze the relation between the ASLR test and the Posterior Pelvic Pain Provocation (PPPP) test, and to investigate the relation with confounders. Data of 110 women with LPP and 72 without LPP were available. The advantages and disadvantages of four cutoff points of ASLR, and combinations of the ASLR and PPPP, were investigated by comparing sensitivity, specificity and area under the curves (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC). The influence of the site of pain was analyzed by means of AUC. The relation with confounders was measured using Pearson correlation coefficients. Results show that for diagnostic use the best cutoff for the ASLR test in pregnancy is between score 0 and 1. Specificity of the ASLR test is good (88%). Sensitivity for all types of LPP during pregnancy is moderate (54%), and is larger in case of more pain and disability. When combined with the PPPP test, sensitivity of the ASLR test is larger (68%). Isolated symphyseal pain, isolated low back pain and isolated coccyx pain are not diagnosed by these two tests. The ASLR test is not influenced by age, number of previous deliveries, BMI, cause of LPP (pregnancy-related or not), the existence of urinary incontinence and/or level of fatigue.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1356-689X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-2769</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.math.2012.01.007</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22365484</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Scotland: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Diagnostics ; Female ; Humans ; Leg ; Low back pain ; Low Back Pain - diagnosis ; Movement ; Pain Measurement - methods ; Pelvic girdle pain ; Pelvic Girdle Pain - diagnosis ; Physical Examination - methods ; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy Complications - diagnosis ; Pregnancy Trimester, Third ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Statistics, Nonparametric ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Manual therapy, 2012-08, Vol.17 (4), p.364-368</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2012 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c477t-f8f885a0f9eea4fc64850573924734f12842c016f027ef8fbad5c6d42cd94c403</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c477t-f8f885a0f9eea4fc64850573924734f12842c016f027ef8fbad5c6d42cd94c403</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1356689X12000082$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22365484$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mens, Jan M.A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huis in ’t Veld, Yvonne H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pool-Goudzwaard, Annelies</creatorcontrib><title>The Active Straight Leg Raise test in lumbopelvic pain during pregnancy</title><title>Manual therapy</title><addtitle>Man Ther</addtitle><description>Abstract Although many properties of the Active Straight Leg Raise (ASLR) test as a diagnostic test in lumbopelvic pain (LPP) are well documented, various elements are lacking. A cross-sectional study was performed to compute sensitivity and specificity, to assess the advantages and disadvantages of various cutoff points, to analyze the relation between the ASLR test and the Posterior Pelvic Pain Provocation (PPPP) test, and to investigate the relation with confounders. Data of 110 women with LPP and 72 without LPP were available. The advantages and disadvantages of four cutoff points of ASLR, and combinations of the ASLR and PPPP, were investigated by comparing sensitivity, specificity and area under the curves (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC). The influence of the site of pain was analyzed by means of AUC. The relation with confounders was measured using Pearson correlation coefficients. Results show that for diagnostic use the best cutoff for the ASLR test in pregnancy is between score 0 and 1. Specificity of the ASLR test is good (88%). Sensitivity for all types of LPP during pregnancy is moderate (54%), and is larger in case of more pain and disability. When combined with the PPPP test, sensitivity of the ASLR test is larger (68%). Isolated symphyseal pain, isolated low back pain and isolated coccyx pain are not diagnosed by these two tests. The ASLR test is not influenced by age, number of previous deliveries, BMI, cause of LPP (pregnancy-related or not), the existence of urinary incontinence and/or level of fatigue.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Diagnostics</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Leg</subject><subject>Low back pain</subject><subject>Low Back Pain - diagnosis</subject><subject>Movement</subject><subject>Pain Measurement - methods</subject><subject>Pelvic girdle pain</subject><subject>Pelvic Girdle Pain - diagnosis</subject><subject>Physical Examination - methods</subject><subject>Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Pregnancy Complications - diagnosis</subject><subject>Pregnancy Trimester, Third</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Statistics, Nonparametric</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1356-689X</issn><issn>1532-2769</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kUtr3DAUhUVJaR7NH8giaJmNnStZkm0IgRCaBwwUmhSyExr5ekYTvyLZA_PvKzNJFll0pcvlOwfdcwg5Y5AyYOpyk7ZmXKccGE-BpQD5N3LEZMYTnqvyIM6ZVIkqypdDchzCBgBKAfIHOeQ8U1IU4ojcP6-R3tjRbZE-jd641XqkC1zRP8YFpCOGkbqONlO77Adsts7SwcRFNXnXrejgcdWZzu5-ku-1aQKevr8n5O_dr-fbh2Tx-_7x9maRWJHnY1IXdVFIA3WJaERtlSgkyDwrucgzUTNeCG7jbTXwHCO8NJW0qorLqhRWQHZCLva-g-_fpvg73bpgsWlMh_0UdAwmV5wrkBHle9T6PgSPtR68a43fRWjmlN7oOUA9B6iB6RhgFJ2_-0_LFqtPyUdiEbjaAxiv3Dr0OliHncXKebSjrnr3f__rL3LbuM5Z07ziDsOmn3wX89NMh6jRT3OFc4OMx_ag4Nk_NceVsw</recordid><startdate>20120801</startdate><enddate>20120801</enddate><creator>Mens, Jan M.A</creator><creator>Huis in ’t Veld, Yvonne H</creator><creator>Pool-Goudzwaard, Annelies</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120801</creationdate><title>The Active Straight Leg Raise test in lumbopelvic pain during pregnancy</title><author>Mens, Jan M.A ; Huis in ’t Veld, Yvonne H ; Pool-Goudzwaard, Annelies</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c477t-f8f885a0f9eea4fc64850573924734f12842c016f027ef8fbad5c6d42cd94c403</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Diagnostics</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Leg</topic><topic>Low back pain</topic><topic>Low Back Pain - diagnosis</topic><topic>Movement</topic><topic>Pain Measurement - methods</topic><topic>Pelvic girdle pain</topic><topic>Pelvic Girdle Pain - diagnosis</topic><topic>Physical Examination - methods</topic><topic>Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Pregnancy Complications - diagnosis</topic><topic>Pregnancy Trimester, Third</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Statistics, Nonparametric</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mens, Jan M.A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huis in ’t Veld, Yvonne H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pool-Goudzwaard, Annelies</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Manual therapy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mens, Jan M.A</au><au>Huis in ’t Veld, Yvonne H</au><au>Pool-Goudzwaard, Annelies</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Active Straight Leg Raise test in lumbopelvic pain during pregnancy</atitle><jtitle>Manual therapy</jtitle><addtitle>Man Ther</addtitle><date>2012-08-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>364</spage><epage>368</epage><pages>364-368</pages><issn>1356-689X</issn><eissn>1532-2769</eissn><abstract>Abstract Although many properties of the Active Straight Leg Raise (ASLR) test as a diagnostic test in lumbopelvic pain (LPP) are well documented, various elements are lacking. A cross-sectional study was performed to compute sensitivity and specificity, to assess the advantages and disadvantages of various cutoff points, to analyze the relation between the ASLR test and the Posterior Pelvic Pain Provocation (PPPP) test, and to investigate the relation with confounders. Data of 110 women with LPP and 72 without LPP were available. The advantages and disadvantages of four cutoff points of ASLR, and combinations of the ASLR and PPPP, were investigated by comparing sensitivity, specificity and area under the curves (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC). The influence of the site of pain was analyzed by means of AUC. The relation with confounders was measured using Pearson correlation coefficients. Results show that for diagnostic use the best cutoff for the ASLR test in pregnancy is between score 0 and 1. Specificity of the ASLR test is good (88%). Sensitivity for all types of LPP during pregnancy is moderate (54%), and is larger in case of more pain and disability. When combined with the PPPP test, sensitivity of the ASLR test is larger (68%). Isolated symphyseal pain, isolated low back pain and isolated coccyx pain are not diagnosed by these two tests. The ASLR test is not influenced by age, number of previous deliveries, BMI, cause of LPP (pregnancy-related or not), the existence of urinary incontinence and/or level of fatigue.</abstract><cop>Scotland</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>22365484</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.math.2012.01.007</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1356-689X
ispartof Manual therapy, 2012-08, Vol.17 (4), p.364-368
issn 1356-689X
1532-2769
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1017622605
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Adult
Cross-Sectional Studies
Diagnostics
Female
Humans
Leg
Low back pain
Low Back Pain - diagnosis
Movement
Pain Measurement - methods
Pelvic girdle pain
Pelvic Girdle Pain - diagnosis
Physical Examination - methods
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Complications - diagnosis
Pregnancy Trimester, Third
Sensitivity and Specificity
Statistics, Nonparametric
Surveys and Questionnaires
Young Adult
title The Active Straight Leg Raise test in lumbopelvic pain during pregnancy
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T14%3A34%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Active%20Straight%20Leg%20Raise%20test%20in%20lumbopelvic%20pain%20during%20pregnancy&rft.jtitle=Manual%20therapy&rft.au=Mens,%20Jan%20M.A&rft.date=2012-08-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=364&rft.epage=368&rft.pages=364-368&rft.issn=1356-689X&rft.eissn=1532-2769&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.math.2012.01.007&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1017622605%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1017622605&rft_id=info:pmid/22365484&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S1356689X12000082&rfr_iscdi=true