PTOtherJournal of physical therapy science2021

Examination of the innominate movements in individuals with and without a positive march test.

Beth Moody Jones, Yuri Yoshida

PMID 34393370

WHAT IT FOUND

March test groups differed in pelvic movement, but the direction depended on position.

The positive group moved more while standing, and less during hip flexion at 90 and 100 degrees, and during the March test motion.

Key findings

01During hip flexion at 90 and 100 degrees, and during the active March test motion, the positive group had smaller innominate angles than the negative group.

02While standing, the positive group had a larger innominate angle than the negative group.

03Clinical outcome scores did not differ significantly, although the positive group had a higher mean low-back disability score that exceeded the reported minimal clinically important difference.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

Only 16 healthy volunteers were tested, so the findings cannot be applied to people with suspected sacroiliac joint dysfunction or low back pain. The March test result was determined by one experienced tester, and the study did not evaluate the test's reliability against another clinician or a reference standard. The movement measurement used external markers and passive motion capture, which can be affected by soft tissue and marker placement; the authors say imaging may be needed to verify alignment. Clinical outcome scores did not differ significantly, so the movement differences were not linked to pain, disability, or function.

Declared interests

All authors declared no potential conflict of interest.

The easy way to misread this

Do not conclude that a positive March test confirms sacroiliac joint dysfunction. The study measured pelvic movement in 16 healthy volunteers and did not show that the test identifies people with pain or disability.

Read it on PubMed →