R A Swinkels | PubMed Health

PubMedDate not supplied

Which are the best instruments for measuring disabilities in gait and gait-related activities in patients with rheumatic disorders.

OBJECTIVES: Our first objective was to make an inventory of available instruments for the assessment of disabilities in gait and related activities in patients with rheumatic disorders. Our second aim was to investigate which of these instruments have acceptable methodological quality with regard to reliability and validity. Our third aim was to investigate the assumption that the evaluation of convergent construct validity results in stronger correlations when validated against a more similar construct. MATERIALS: A computer-aided literature search (1982-2001) of several databases was performed to identify studies focusing on the clinimetric properties of instruments to assess impairments in function in patients with rheumatic disorders. Data on intra-rater reliability, inter-rater reliability and convergent construct validity were extracted in a standardized manner and compared to a priori defined criteria. RESULTS: In total 78 instruments were eligible. Intra-observer reliability was investigated for 28 instruments and only 7 demonstrated good reliability as well as good validity. Surprisingly, the convergent construct validation against a similar construct resulted often in lower correlations than validation against a less similar construct. CONCLUSION: Based on the available information, the Rheumatoid Arthritis Quality of Life Scale and the Health Assessment Questionnaire seem to be the best instruments for assessing disabilities in gait and related activities in patients with rheumatic disorders.

Databases, Factual↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Upper cervical instability: fact or fiction?

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review is to examine the internal validity of the standardized clinical stability tests for the upper cervical spine in relation to symptomatology. Whether radiology can confirm the clinical diagnosis is also examined. The importance of radiology in this situation, the pathogenesis and the prevalence of atlanto-axial hypermobility and the clinical symptomatology are discussed. DATA SOURCES: A literature search from January 1984 to March 1995. We consulted the CD-ROM Medline with the keywords "atlanto-axial instability," "atlanto-axial dislocation," "hypermobility," "cervical spine" and "atlanto-axial joint." Ninety-six Dutch, French, German, and English publications were selected. The Documentation Centre of the Institute for Research and Postgraduate Education Physiotherapy (SWSF) was consulted with the keywords: atlanto-axial joint, upper cervical spine, segmental examination, interobserver-reliability, intraobserver-reliability, interobserver variation, intraobserver variation, manual therapy, examination, diagnostics. Finally, recent developments and views published during this study were added. RESULTS: There seems to be no correlation between the amount of hypermobility or subluxation and the presence of clinical signs or neurological signs. The clinical signs can vary from relatively diffuse complaints, no symptoms and signs to serious ones. Radiology does not seem to be a reliable diagnostic mechanism in relation to upper-cervical instability. Conventional X-rays fail to give adequate information about atlanto-axial stability. CT-scan and MRI can visualize much more because of the direct sagittal projection but neither is an absolute standard. Furthermore, in relation to upper-cervical hypermobility, the validity of radiology is under debate. CONCLUSION: There is no correlation between the measure of hypermobility and the presence of clinical symptoms. Also, the validity of the upper-cervical stability tests is questionable. In diagnostics, every radiological examination measures anatomical and morphological variables, not functional variables. Despite this, CT and MRI should be preferred in diagnostics over conventional functional radiology.

Atlanto-Axial Joint↗