STUDY DESIGN: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests to identify stress fractures in the lower limb. BACKGROUND: Stress fractures are a bone-related overuse injury primarily occurring in the lower limb and commonly affecting running athletes and military personnel. Physical examination procedures and clinical tests are suggested for diagnosing stress fractures; however, data on the diagnostic accuracy of these tests have not been investigated through a systematic review of the literature. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in 8 electronic databases to identify diagnostic accuracy studies, published between January 1950 and June 2011, that evaluated clinical tests against a radiological diagnosis of lower-limb stress fracture. Retrieved articles were evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool, and a meta-analysis was performed where appropriate. RESULTS: Nine articles investigating 2 clinical procedures, therapeutic ultrasound (n = 7) and tuning fork testing (n = 2), met the study inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was used to statistically analyze the data extracted from the ultrasound articles and demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 64% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 55%, 73%), specificity of 63% (95% CI: 54%, 71%), positive likelihood ratio of 2.1 (95% CI: 1.1, 3.5), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.3 (95% CI: 0.1, 0.9). Tuning fork test data could not be pooled; however, sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio ranged from 35% to 92%, 19% to 83%, 0.6 to 3.0, and 0.4 to 1.6, respectively. CONCLUSION: The results of this systematic review do not support the specific use of ultrasound or tuning forks as standalone diagnostic tests for lower-limb stress fractures. As the overall diagnostic accuracy of the tests investigated is not strong, based on the calculated likelihood ratios, it is recommended that radiological imaging should continue to be used for the confirmation and diagnosis of stress fractures of the lower limb. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnosis, level 1a–.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2012;42(9):760-771, Epub 19 July 2012. doi:10.2519/jospt.2012.4000

KEY WORDS: diagnosis, lower limb, tuning fork, ultrasound, validity

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic literature review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests used to diagnose patients with structural lumbar segmental instability (LSI). BACKGROUND: Patients with structural LSI represent an important, identifiable subgrouping of individuals with low back pain. Numerous clinical tests have been proposed to diagnose structural LSI; however, data on the diagnostic accuracy of these tests have not yet been evaluated through a systematic review of the literature. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in 6 electronic databases for diagnostic accuracy studies, published between January 1950 and March 2010, that evaluated clinical tests against radiological diagnosis of structural LSI. The diagnostic accuracy of the clinical tests from the retrieved articles was independently evaluated, reviewed, and quality scored using the QUADAS tool. RESULTS: Four articles and a total of 11 clinical tests used in the diagnosis of structural LSI met the study inclusion criteria. The majority of tests had high specificity but low sensitivity, with positive likelihood ratios ranging from very small to moderate. QUADAS scores ranged from 16 to 25 out of a possible 26. The passive lumbar extension test was the most accurate clinical test, with high sensitivity (84%), specificity (90%), and a positive likelihood ratio of 8.8 (95% CI: 4.5, 17.3), indicating that this clinical test may be useful in the differential diagnosis of structural LSI. CONCLUSION: This systematic review found that the majority of clinical tests routinely employed to diagnose structural LSI demonstrated only limited ability to do so. The results do, however, indicate that the passive lumbar extension test may be useful in orthopaedic clinical practice to diagnose structural LSI. Additional research is required to further validate its use for diagnosing structural LSI in all populations of those with low back pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnosis, level 2a.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2011;41(3):130-140, Epub 2 February 2011. doi:10.2519/jospt.2011.3457

KEY WORDS: accuracy, low back pain, physical examination, validity