| Conclusie | |||||
Er is matig bewijs dat de sensitiviteit voor de Gaenslens Test laag tot gemiddeld is. |
|||||
| Titel + Auteurs + Jaartal | Soort artikel | Methodologische kwaliteit | Sensitiviteit | ||
| van der Wurff, P., Buijs, E. J., & Groen, G. J. (2006). A multitest regimen of pain provocation tests as an aid to reduce unnecessary minimally invasive sacroiliac joint procedures. Phys | Diagnostic accuracy study | QUADAS-1 11/14
JADAD 4 | 0,63 | ||
| Laslett, M., Young, T., & McDonald, B. (2005). Diagnosing painful sacroiliac joints: A validity study of a McKenzie evaluation and sacroiliac provocation tests. Australian Journal of Physiotherapy, 49 | Validity study | QUADAD-1 11/14
JADAD 2 | 0,50 - 0,53 | ||
| Ozgocmen, S., Bozgeyik, Z., Kalcik, M., & Yildirim, A. (2008). The value of sacroiliac pain provocation tests in early active sacroiliitis. Clinical Rheumatology, 27 doi: 10.1007/s10067-008-0907-z | Diagnostic accuracy study | QUADAS-1 10/14
JADAD 3 | 0,36-0,44 | ||
| Cook, C., Massa, L., Harm-Emandes, I., Segneri, R., Adcock, J., Kennedy, C., & Figuers, C. (2007). INTERRATERRELIABILITY AND DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY OF PELVIC GIRDLE PAIN CLASSIFICATION. Journal of Maniplulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 30(4) doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.03.008 | Diagnostic accuracy study | QUADAS-1 12/14
JADAD 2 | 0,47 | ||
