PTOtherThe South African journal of physiotherapy2019

Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of six musculoskeletal preparticipatory screening tests.

Nosipho Zumana, Benita Olivier, Lonwabo Godlwana and 1 others

PMID 31061912

WHAT IT FOUND

Only the one-legged hyperextension and bridge-hold tests showed substantial to excellent agreement between two physiotherapists.

Several other tests were inconsistent, so screening results should not be treated as standalone evidence.

Key findings

01The one-legged hyperextension test had substantial to excellent agreement between raters, but only moderate to fair agreement when the same rater tested again.

02The bridge-hold test had substantial to excellent agreement between raters, while agreement for the same rater was fair to moderate.

03The standing stork test had no agreement for the same rater in Session 1 and at most fair agreement between raters.

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 31 of the 35 selected participants were analysed because four did not return for the second session. The sample was healthy, injury-free, young male university soccer and cricket players, so the results may not apply to female athletes, older athletes, injured athletes or other sports. Only two physiotherapists were involved, so the study does not show how other medical or fitness professionals would perform the tests. The study measured agreement between raters, not whether the tests correctly identify injury risk or future injury. Some confidence intervals were broad, including for the empty can test, so the reported agreement levels are uncertain. The tests were performed in real time without motion analysis, which may have made observations harder to reproduce.

The easy way to misread this

Do not assume these screening tests predict injury. This study measured agreement between raters, not whether positive tests identify future injury, and several tests showed poor or inconsistent agreement.

Read it on PubMed →