Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Posterior pelvic pain provocation test is negative in patients with lumbar herniated discs

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The classification of pelvic girdle pain can only be reached after lumbar causes have been excluded by a clinical examination. During clinical examination, the posterior pelvic pain provocation test is a well-established method for verifying pelvic girdle pain. However, a criticism of pelvic pain provocation tests is that they may have an effect on lumbar structures, thus yielding false-positive results. The posterior pelvic pain provocation test was performed with four groups of patients: patients with computed tomography-verified disc herniations (1) on the waiting list for surgery (14 women; 9 men); (2) 6 weeks after disc surgery (18 women, 12 men); (3) pregnant women seeking care for pelvic girdle pain (n = 25); and (4) women with persistent pelvic girdle pain after delivery (n = 32). The sensitivity of the posterior pelvic pain provocation test was 0.88 and the specificity was 0.89. The positive predictive value was 0.89 and the negative predictive value was 0.87. Analysis of only women showed similar results. In our study, the posterior pelvic pain provocation test was negative in patients with a well-defined lumbar diagnosis of lumbar disc herniation, both before and after disc surgery. Our results are an important step toward the more accurate classification of lumbopelvic pain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Albert H, Godskesen M, Westergaard J (2000) Evaluation of clinical tests used in classification procedures in pregnancy-related pelvic joint pain. Eur Spine J 9:161–166. doi:10.1007/s005860050228

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Albert HB, Godskesen M, Westergaard JG (2002) Incidence of four syndromes of pregnancy-related pelvic joint pain. Spine 27:2831–2834. doi:10.1097/00007632-200212150-00020

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Altman DG (1991) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman & Hall/CRC, London

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bjorklund K, Bergstrom S (2000) Is pelvic pain in pregnancy a welfare complaint? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 79:24–30. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0412.2000.079001024.x

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Cook C, Massa L, Harm-Ernandes I, Segneri R, Adcock J, Kennedy C et al (2007) Interrater reliability and diagnostic accuracy of pelvic girdle pain classification. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 30:252–258. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.03.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Elden H, Ladfors L, Olsen MF, Ostgaard HC, Hagberg H (2005) Effects of acupuncture and stabilising exercises as adjunct to standard treatment in pregnant women with pelvic girdle pain: randomised single blind controlled trial. BMJ 330:761. doi:10.1136/bmj.38397.507014.E0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fast A, Shapiro D, Ducommun EJ, Friedmann LW, Bouklas T, Floman Y (1987) Low-back pain in pregnancy. Spine 12:368–371. doi:10.1097/00007632-198705000-00011

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gutke A, Ostgaard HC, Oberg B (2006) Pelvic girdle pain and lumbar pain in pregnancy: a cohort study of the consequences in terms of health and functioning. Spine 31:E149–E155. doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000201259.63363.e1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gutke A, Ostgaard HC, Oberg B (2008) Association between muscle function and low back pain in relation to pregnancy. J Rehabil Med 40:304–311. doi:10.2340/16501977-0170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hancock MJ, Maher CG, Latimer J, Spindler MF, McAuley JH, Laslett M et al (2007) Systematic review of tests to identify the disc, SIJ or facet joint as the source of low back pain. Eur Spine J 16:1539–1550. doi:10.1007/s00586-007-0391-1

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kokmeyer DJ, Van der Wurff P, Aufdemkampe G, Fickenscher TC (2002) The reliability of multitest regimens with sacroiliac pain provocation tests. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 25:42–48. doi:10.1067/mmt.2002.120418

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kristiansson P, Svardsudd K (1996) Discriminatory power of tests applied in back pain during pregnancy. Spine 21:2337–2343. doi:10.1097/00007632-199610150-00006 discussion 2343–2334

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Laslett M, Young SB, Aprill CN, McDonald B (2003) Diagnosing painful sacroiliac joints: a validity study of a McKenzie evaluation and sacroiliac provocation tests. Aust J Physiother 49:89–97

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Laslett M, Aprill CN, McDonald B, Young SB (2005) Diagnosis of sacroiliac joint pain: validity of individual provocation tests and composites of tests. Man Ther 10:207–218. doi:10.1016/j.math.2005.01.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mens JM, Vleeming A, Stoeckart R, Stam HJ, Snijders CJ (1996) Understanding peripartum pelvic pain: implications of a patient survey. Spine 21:1363–1369. doi:10.1097/00007632-199606010-00017 discussion 1369–1370

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Noren L, Ostgaard S, Johansson G, Ostgaard HC (2002) Lumbar back and posterior pelvic pain during pregnancy: a 3-year follow-up. Eur Spine J 11:267–271. doi:10.1007/s00586-001-0357-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ostgaard HC, Andersson GB, Karlsson K (1991) Prevalence of back pain in pregnancy. Spine 16:549–552. doi:10.1097/00007632-199105000-00011

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ostgaard HC, Zetherstrom G, Roos-Hansson E (1994) The posterior pelvic pain provocation test in pregnant women. Eur Spine J 3:258–260. doi:10.1007/BF02226575

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Ostgaard HC, Zetherstrom G, Roos-Hansson E, Svanberg B (1994) Reduction of back and posterior pelvic pain in pregnancy. Spine 19:894–900

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Ostgaard HC, Roos-Hansson E, Zetherstrom G (1996) Regression of back and posterior pelvic pain after pregnancy. Spine 21:2777–2780. doi:10.1097/00007632-199612010-00013

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Robinson HS, Brox JI, Robinson R, Bjelland E, Solem S, Telje T (2007) The reliability of selected motion and pain provocation tests for the sacroiliac joint. Man Ther 12:72–79. doi:10.1016/j.math.2005.09.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sturesson B, Uden G, Uden A (1997) Pain pattern in pregnancy and “catching” of the leg in pregnant women with posterior pelvic pain. Spine 22:1880–1883. doi:10.1097/00007632-199708150-00013 discussion 1884

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. van der Wurff P, Hagmeijer RH, Meyne W (2000) Clinical tests of the sacroiliac joint: a systemic methodological review. Part 1. Reliability. Man Ther 5:30–36

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. van Tulder M, Becker A, Bekkering T, Breen A, del Real MT, Hutchinson A et al (2006) European guidelines for the management of acute nonspecific low back pain in primary care, chap 3. Eur Spine J 15(Suppl 2):S169–S191. doi:10.1007/s00586-006-1071-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Vleeming A, Albert HB, Ostgaard HC, Sturesson B, Stuge B (2008) European guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pelvic girdle pain. Eur Spine J 17:794–819. doi:10.1007/s00586-008-0602-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wormslev M, Juul AM, Marques B, Minck H, Bentzen L, Hansen TM (1994) Clinical examination of pelvic insufficiency during pregnancy: an evaluation of the interobserver variation, the relation between clinical signs and pain and the relation between clinical signs and physical disability. Scand J Rheumatol 23:96–102. doi:10.3109/03009749409103036

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Wu WH, Meijer OG, Uegaki K, Mens JM, van Dieen JH, Wuisman PI et al (2004) Pregnancy-related pelvic girdle pain (PPP). I. Terminology, clinical presentation, and prevalence. Eur Spine J 13:575–589. doi:10.1007/s00586-003-0615-y

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors declare that the study complies with the current laws of the country.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Physiotherapy, Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, Linköping University, 581 83, Linköping, Sweden

    Annelie Gutke

  2. Department of Physiotherapy, Frölunda Specialist Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Eva Roos Hansson & Gunilla Zetherström

  3. Department of Orthopedics, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Hans Christian Östgaard

Authors
  1. Annelie Gutke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eva Roos Hansson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gunilla Zetherström
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hans Christian Östgaard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annelie Gutke.

Additional information

The author Gunilla Zetherström is deceased.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gutke, A., Hansson, E.R., Zetherström, G. et al. Posterior pelvic pain provocation test is negative in patients with lumbar herniated discs. Eur Spine J 18, 1008–1012 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-1003-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-1003-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation