Skip to main content

Systematic review of diagnostic accuracy of patient history, clinical findings, and physical tests in the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis

European Spine Journal volume 29, pages 93–112 (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

To update evidence of diagnostic potential for identification of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) based on demographic and patient history, clinical findings, and physical tests, and report posttest probabilities associated with test findings.

Methods

An electronic search of PubMed, CINAHL and Embase was conducted combining terms related to low back pain, stenosis and diagnostic accuracy. Prospective or retrospective studies investigating diagnostic accuracy of LSS using patient history, clinical findings and/or physical tests were included. The risk of bias and applicability were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS 2) tool. Diagnostic accuracy including sensitivities (SN), specificities (SP), likelihood ratios (+LR and −LR) and posttest probabilities (+PTP and −PTP) with 95% confidence intervals were summarized.

Results

Nine studies were included (pooled n = 36,228 participants) investigating 49 different index tests (30 demographic and patient history and 19 clinical findings/physical tests). Of the nine studies included, only two exhibited a low risk of bias and seven exhibited good applicability according to QUADAS 2. The demographic and patient history measures (self-reported history questionnaire, no pain when seated, numbness of perineal region) and the clinical findings/physical tests (two-stage treadmill test, symptoms after a March test and abnormal Romberg test) highly improved positive posttest probability by > 25% to diagnose LSS.

Conclusion

Outside of one study that was able to completely rule out LSS with no functional neurological changes none of the stand-alone findings were strong enough to rule in or rule out LSS.

Graphic abstract

These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Katz JN, Harris MB (2008) Clinical practice. Lumbar spinal stenosis. N Engl J Med 358(8):818–825. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmcp0708097

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kalichman L, Cole R, Kim DH, Li L, Suri P, Guermazi A, Hunter DJ (2009) Spinal stenosis prevalence and association with symptoms: the Framingham Study. Spine J 9(7):545–550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2009.03.005

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Singh K, Samartzis D, Vaccaro AR, Nassr A, Andersson GB, Yoon ST, Phillips FM, Goldberg EJ, An HS (2005) Congenital lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective, control-matched, cohort radiographic analysis. Spine J 5(6):615–622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2005.05.385

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. De Villiers PD, Booysen EL (1976) Fibrous spinal stenosis. A report on 850 myelograms with a water-soluble contrast medium. Clin Orthop Relat Res 115:140–144

    Google Scholar 

  5. Roberson GH, Llewellyn HJ, Taveras JM (1973) The narrow lumbar spinal canal syndrome. Radiology 107(1):89–97. https://doi.org/10.1148/107.1.89

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fanuele JC, Birkmeyer NJ, Abdu WA, Tosteson TD, Weinstein JN (2000) The impact of spinal problems on the health status of patients: have we underestimated the effect? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25(12):1509–1514

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. de Graaf I, Prak A, Bierma-Zeinstra S, Thomas S, Peul W, Koes B (2006) Diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review of the accuracy of diagnostic tests. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31(10):1168–1176. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000216463.32136.7b

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. de Schepper EI, Overdevest GM, Suri P, Peul WC, Oei EH, Koes BW, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Luijsterburg PA (2013) Diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis: an updated systematic review of the accuracy of diagnostic tests. Spine 38(8):E469–E481. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0b013e31828935ac

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Dinnes J, Reitsma J, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J (2004) Development and validation of methods for assessing the quality of diagnostic accuracy studies. Health Technol Assess 8(25):1–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, Leeflang MM, Sterne JA, Bossuyt PM, Group Q (2011) QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 155(8):529–536. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. McInnes MDF, Moher D, Thombs BD, McGrath TA, Bossuyt PM, Clifford T, Cohen JF, Deeks JJ, Gatsonis C, Hooft L, Hunt HA, Hyde CJ, Korevaar DA, Leeflang MMG, Macaskill P, Reitsma JB, Rodin R, Rutjes AWS, Salameh JP, Stevens A, Takwoingi Y, Tonelli M, Weeks L, Whiting P, Willis BH (2018) Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: the PRISMA-DTA statement. JAMA 319(4):388–396. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.19163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, Thuku M, Hamel C, Moran J, Moher D, Tugwell P, Welch V, Kristjansson E, Henry DA (2017) AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ 358:j4008. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4008

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Bossuyt P, Leeflang M (2008) Chapter 6: developing criteria for including studies. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy version 04 [updated September 2008] The Cochrane Collaboration

  14. Worster A, Carpenter C (2008) Incorporation bias in studies of diagnostic tests: how to avoid being biased about bias. Can J Emerg Med 10(2):174–175

    Google Scholar 

  15. Wayne J (2005) Mosby’s dicfionary of complementary & alternafive medicine. Mosby, St Louis

    Google Scholar 

  16. Harris P, Nagy S, Vardaxis N (2014) ) Mosby’s Dictionary of Medicine, Nursing and Health Professions-Australian & New Zealand Edition. Elsevier Health Sciences, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Linnet K, Moons KG (2012) Beyond diagnostic accuracy: the clinical utility of diagnostic tests. Clin Chem 58(12):1636–1643. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2012.182576

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cook C, Hegedus EJ (2008) Orthopedic physical examination tests: an evidence-based approach. Prentice Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  19. Toolbox E-BM (2018) EBM calculators. https://ebm-tools.knowledgetranslation.net/calculator

  20. Analysis wCT (2018) 2-way contingency table analysis. http://statpages.info/ctab/2x2.html

  21. Calculation E (2018) Diagnostic post test probability of disease calculation. https://www.easycalculation.com/statistics/post-test-probability.php

  22. Cook C, Brown C, Michael K, Isaacs R, Howes C, Richardson W, Roman M, Hegedus E (2011) The clinical value of a cluster of patient history and observational findings as a diagnostic support tool for lumbar spine stenosis. Physiother Res Int 16(3):170–178. https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.500

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Dobbs R, May S, Hope P (2016) The validity of a clinical test for the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis. Man Ther 25:27–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2016.05.332

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Fritz JM, Erhard RE, Delitto A, Welch WC, Nowakowski PE (1997) Preliminary results of the use of a two-stage treadmill test as a clinical diagnostic tool in the differential diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord 10(5):410–416

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Jensen OH, Schmidt-Olsen S (1989) A new functional test in the diagnostic evaluation of neurogenic intermittent claudication. Clin Rheumatol 8(3):363–367

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kato K, Sekiguchi M, Yonemoto K, Kakuma T, Nikaido T, Watanabe K, Otani K, Yabuki S, Kikuchi S, Konno S (2015) Diagnostic accuracy of the Self-administered, Self-reported History Questionnaire for lumbar spinal stenosis patients in Japanese primary care settings: a multicenter cross-sectional study (DISTO-project). J Orthop Sci 20(5):805–810. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-015-0740-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Katz JN, Dalgas M, Stucki G, Katz NP, Bayley J, Fossel AH, Chang LC, Lipson SJ (1995) Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Diagnostic value of the history and physical examination. Arthritis Rheum 38(9):1236–1241

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Konno S, Hayashino Y, Fukuhara S, Kikuchi S, Kaneda K, Seichi A, Chiba K, Satomi K, Nagata K, Kawai S (2007) Development of a clinical diagnosis support tool to identify patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 16(11):1951–1957. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-007-0402-2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Roach KE, Brown MD, Albin RD, Delaney KG, Lipprandi HM, Rangelli D (1997) The sensitivity and specificity of pain response to activity and position in categorizing patients with low back pain. Phys Ther 77(7):730–738

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Sugioka T, Hayashino Y, Konno S, Kikuchi S, Fukuhara S (2008) Predictive value of self-reported patient information for the identification of lumbar spinal stenosis. Fam Pract 25(4):237–244. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmn031

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Simel DL, Rennie D (2016) Low back pain, lumbar spinal stenosis. In: The rational clinical examination: evidence-based clinical diagnosis. McGraw-Hill Education, New York, NY,

  32. O’Connell NE, Cook CE, Wand BM, Ward SP (2016) Clinical guidelines for low back pain: a critical review of consensus and inconsistencies across three major guidelines. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 30(6):968–980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.berh.2017.05.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Di Nisio M, Smidt N, van Rijn JC, Bossuyt PM (2006) Evidence of bias and variation in diagnostic accuracy studies. CMAJ 174(4):469–476. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.050090

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Leeflang MM, Deeks JJ, Takwoingi Y, Macaskill P (2013) Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy reviews. Systematic reviews 2(1):82

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA

    Christian Jaeger Cook

  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Division of Physical Therapy, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, USA

    Chad E. Cook

  3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Division of Physical Therapy, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, USA

    Michael P. Reiman

  4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, USA

    Anand B. Joshi

  5. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Neurosurgery, Spine Division, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, USA

    William Richardson

  6. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Division of Physical Therapy, Duke University School of Medicine, 2200 W. Main St., Durham, NC, 27701, USA

    Alessandra N. Garcia

Authors
  1. Christian Jaeger Cook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chad E. Cook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael P. Reiman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anand B. Joshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. William Richardson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Alessandra N. Garcia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alessandra N. Garcia.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PPTX 139 kb)

Appendices

Appendix 1: PRISMA-DTA checklist—based on blinded manuscript

  1. Adapted From: McInnes MDF, Moher D, Thombs BD, McGrath TA, Bossuyt PM, The PRISMA-DTA Group (2018). Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: The PRISMA-DTA statement. JAMA. 2018 Jan 23;319(4):388–396. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.19163
  2. For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org

Appendix 2: AMSTAR-2 checklist

figure bfigure b

Appendix 3

PubMed search strategy

  1. 1.

    Population: low back pain

low back pain [ti/ab] OR lumbar paraspinal [ti/ab] OR pain [ti/ab] OR back-pain [ti/ab] OR back pain [ti/ab] OR backache [ti/ab] OR back ache [ti/ab] OR dorsalgia [ti/ab] OR lumbago [ti/ab] OR lumbar [ti/ab] OR lumbosacral [ti/ab] OR sciatic [ti/ab] OR radicular [ti/ab] OR lumbar vertebrae [ti/ab] OR spine [ti/ab] OR spinal [ti/ab]

  1. 2.

    Target condition: lumbar spinal stenosis

Stenosis [ti/ab] OR stenosis [ti/ab] OR canal stenosis [ti/ab] OR lumbar spinal stenosis [ti/ab] OR spinal stenosis [ti/ab] OR spine stenosis [ti/ab] OR lss [ti/ab] OR claudication [ti/ab] OR claudicant [ti/ab] OR neurogen* [ti/ab] OR canal compression [ti/ab] OR canal compressing [ti/ab]

  1. 3.

    Index test

Diagnostic [ti/ab] OR diagnosis [ti/ab]

  1. 4.

    Methodological filter

sensitivity [ti/ab] OR specificity [ti/ab] OR sensitive test [ti/ab] OR specific test [ti/ab] OR screening [ti/ab] OR false positive [ti/ab] OR false negative [ti/ab] OR accuracy [ti/ab] OR predictive value [ti/ab] OR predictive values [ti/ab] OR reference value [ti/ab] OR reference values [ti/ab] OR reference standard [ti/ab] OR roc [ti/ab] OR likelihood [ti/ab]

  • Searches (combination): #1 AND #2 AND #3 AND 4

Embase search strategy

  1. 1.

    Population and target condition: lumbar spinal stenosis

‘low back pain’:ta,ab OR ’back’:ab,ta OR ’backache’:ab,ta OR ’lumbar spine’:ta,ab OR ’lumbosacral spine’:ab,ta AND ‘stenosis’:ta,ab OR ’vertebral canal’:ta,ab OR ’vertebral canal stenosis’:ta,ab OR ’claudication’:ta,ab OR ’spinal cord compression’:ta,ab)

  1. 2.

    Index test and methodological filter

(‘diagnosis’:ta,ab OR ’diagnostic procedure’:ta,ab) AND (‘sensitivity and specificity’:ta,ab OR ’screening’:ta,ab OR ’false positive result’:ta,ab OR ’false negative result’:ta,ab OR ’diagnostic accuracy’:ta,ab OR ’predictive value’:ta,ab OR ’reference value’:ta,ab OR ’standard’:ta,ab OR ’likelihood ratio’:ta,ab) AND [humans]/lim

  • Searches (combination): #1 AND #2

CINAHL search strategy

  1. 1.

    Population and target condition: lumbar spinal stenosis

(low back pain OR back pain OR lumbar pain OR back OR backache OR back ache OR dorsalgia OR lumbago OR lumbar OR lumbosacral) AND (stenosis OR stenosis spinal OR canal stenosis OR spinal stenosis OR claudication OR claudicant)

  1. 2.

    Index test and methodological filter

(diagnostic OR diagnosis) AND (sensitivity OR specificity OR specificity and sensitivity OR screening OR false positive OR false negative OR accuracy OR predictive value OR reference values OR reference standards OR likelihood ratio)

  • Searches (combination): #1 AND #2

Appendix 4: List of excluded studies/reasons for exclusion

  1. 1.

    Adachi S, Nakano A, Kin A, Baba I, Kurokawa Y, Neo M (2018) The tibial nerve compression test for the diagnosis of lumbar spinal canal stenosis—a simple and reliable physical examination for use by primary care physicians. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 52(1):12–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aott.2017.04.007

Reason for exclusion: Included patients were pre-diagnosed with LSS.

  1. 2.

    Aizawa T, Tanaka Y, Yokoyama T, Shimada Y, Yamazaki K, Takei H, Konno S, Kawahara C, Itoi E, Kokubun S (2016) New diagnostic support tool for patients with leg symptoms caused by lumbar spinal stenosis and lumbar intervertebral disc herniation: a self-administered, self-reported history questionnaire. J Orthop Sci 21(5):579–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jos.2016.07.012

Reason for exclusion: Included patients were pre-diagnosed with LSS.

  1. 3.

    Ando M, Tamaki T, Kawakami M, Minamide A, Nakagawa Y, Maio K, Enyo Y, Yoshida M (2013) Electrophysiological diagnosis using sensory nerve action potential for the intraforaminal and extraforaminal L5 nerve root entrapment. Eur Spine J 22(4):833–839. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-012-2592-5

Reason for exclusion: Included diagnostic accuracy of tests not related to the scope of this review.

  1. 4.

    Annunziata, CC, Lauerman, WC (1999). When back surgery fails: what’s the next step? Diagnostic findings must be interpreted within the clinical context. J. Musculosk Medicine

Reason for exclusion: Other study designs.

  1. 5.

    Arce D, Sass P, Abul-Khoudoud H (2001). Recognizing spinal cord emergencies. Am Fam Physician

Reason for exclusion: Other study designs.

  1. 6.

    Barz T, Staub LP, Melloh M, Hamann G, Lord SJ, Chatfield MD, Bossuyt PM, Lange J, Merk HR (2014) Clinical validity of the nerve root sedimentation sign in patients with suspected lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine J 14(4):667–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.105

Reason for exclusion: Included diagnostic accuracy of tests not related to the scope of this review.

  1. 7.

    Bosscher HA, Heavner JE (2012) Diagnosis of the vertebral level from which low back or leg pain originates. A comparison of clinical evaluation, MRI and epiduroscopy. Pain Pract 12(7):506–512. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-2500.2012.00549.x

Reason for exclusion: Included diagnostic accuracy of tests not related to the scope of this review.

  1. 8.

    Chien JJ, Bajwa ZH (2008). What is mechanical back pain and how best to treat it? Curr Pain Headache Rep

Reason for exclusion: Other study designs.

  1. 9.

    Dvonch V, Scarff T, Bunch WH, Smith D, Boscardin J, Lebarge H, Ibrahim K (1984) Dermatomal somatosensory evoked potentials: their use in lumbar radiculopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 9(3):291–293

Reason for exclusion: Included diagnostic accuracy of tests not related to the scope of this review.

  1. 10.

    Esmailiejah AA, Abbasian M, Bidar R, Esmailiejah N, Safdari F, Amirjamshidi A (2018) Diagnostic efficacy of clinical tests for lumbar spinal instability. Surg Neurol Int 9:17. https://doi.org/10.4103/sni.sni_359_17

Reason for exclusion: Included patients were pre-diagnosed with LSS.

  1. 11.

    Faciszewski T, Broste SK, Fardon D (1997) Quality of data regarding diagnoses of spinal disorders in administrative databases. A multicenter study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 79(10):1481–1488

Reason for exclusion: Included other causes of LBP.

  1. 12.

    Genevay S, Courvoisier DS, Konstantinou K, Kovacs FM, Marty M, Rainville J, Norberg M, Kaux JF, Cha TD, Katz JN, Atlas SJ (2018) Clinical classification criteria for neurogenic claudication caused by lumbar spinal stenosis. The N-CLASS criteria. Spine J 18(6):941–947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2017.10.003

Reason for exclusion: Included patients were pre-diagnosed with LSS.

  1. 13.

    Haig AJ, Tong HC, Yamakawa KS, Quint DJ, Hoff JT, Chiodo A, Miner JA, Choksi VR, Geisser ME (2005) The sensitivity and specificity of electrodiagnostic testing for the clinical syndrome of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30(23):2667–2676

Reason for exclusion: Included diagnostic accuracy of tests not related to the scope of this review.

  1. 14.

    Hayashi H, Toribatake Y, Murakami H, Yoneyama T, Watanabe T, Tsuchiya H (2015) Gait analysis using a support vector machine for lumbar spinal stenosis. Orthopedics 38(11):e959–e964. https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20151020-02

Reason for exclusion: Included healthy volunteers.

  1. 15.

    Kato Y, Kawakami T, Kifune M, Kishimoto T, Nibu K, Oda H, Shirasawa K, Tominaga T, Toyoda K, Tsue K, Taguchi T (2009) Validation study of a clinical diagnosis support tool for lumbar spinal stenosis. J Orthop Sci 14(6):711–718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-009-1391-2

Reason for exclusion: Included diagnostic accuracy of tests not related to the scope of this review.

  1. 16.

    Konno S, Kikuchi S, Tanaka Y, Yamazaki K, Shimada Y, Takei H, Yokoyama T, Okada M, Kokubun S (2007) A diagnostic support tool for lumbar spinal stenosis: a self-administered, self-reported history questionnaire. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 8:102. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-8-102

Reason for exclusion: Included other causes of LBP.

  1. 17.

    Laslett M, McDonald B, Tropp H, Aprill CN, Oberg B (2005) Agreement between diagnoses reached by clinical examination and available reference standards: a prospective study of 216 patients with lumbopelvic pain. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 6:28. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-6-28

Reason for exclusion: Included other causes of LBP.

  1. 18.

    Lee JH, Lee SH (2012) Physical examination, magnetic resonance imaging, and electrodiagnostic study of patients with lumbosacral disc herniation or spinal stenosis. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 44(10):845–850

Reason for exclusion: Included other causes of LBP.

  1. 19.

    Leng GC, Fowkes FG (1992) The Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire: an improved version of the WHO/Rose Questionnaire for use in epidemiological surveys. J Clin Epidemiol 45(10):1101–1109

Reason for exclusion: Included other causes of LBP.

  1. 20.

    Lin JH, Hsieh YC, Chen YC, Wang Y, Chen CC, Chiang YH (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of standardised qualitative sensory test in the detection of lumbar lateral stenosis involving the L5 nerve root. Sci Rep 7(1):10598. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-10641-2

Reason for exclusion: Included diagnostic accuracy of tests not related to the scope of this review.

  1. 21.

    Mann NH, 3rd, Brown MD, Enger I (1992) Expert performance in low-back disorder recognition using patient pain drawings. J Spinal Disord 5(3):254–259

Reason for exclusion: Included other causes of LBP.

  1. 22.

    Martin BI, Lurie JD, Tosteson AN, Deyo RA, Tosteson TD, Weinstein JN, Mirza SK (2014) Indications for spine surgery: validation of an administrative coding algorithm to classify degenerative diagnoses. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39(9):769–779. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000000275

Reason for exclusion: Other study designs.

  1. 23.

    Nayeb Aghaei H, Azimi P, Shahzadi S, Azhari S, Mohammadi HR (2015) Role of the Self-Administered, Self-Reported History Questionnaire to identify types of Lumbar spinal stenosis: a sensitivity analysis. Asian Spine J 9(5):689–693. https://doi.org/10.4184/asj.2015.9.5.689

Reason for exclusion: Other study designs.

  1. 24.

    Ohtori S, Sekiguchi M, Yonemoto K, Kakuma T, Takahashi K, Konno S (2014) Awareness and use of diagnostic support tools for lumbar spinal stenosis in Japan. J Orthop Sci 19(3):412–417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-014-0551-1

Reason for exclusion: Included diagnostic accuracy of tests not related to the scope of this review.

  1. 25.

    Papadakis NC, Christakis DG, Tzagarakis GN, Chlouverakis GI, Kampanis NA, Stergiopoulos KN, Katonis PG (2009) Gait variability measurements in lumbar spinal stenosis patients: part A. Comparison with healthy subjects. Physiol Meas 30(11):1171–1186. https://doi.org/10.1088/0967-3334/30/11/003

Reason for exclusion: Included healthy volunteers.

  1. 26.

    Shevelev IN, Konovalov NA, Cherkashov AM, Molodchenkov AA, Sharamko TG, Asiutin DS, Nazarenko AG (2013) [Virtual clinical diagnosis support system of degenerative stenosis of the lumbar spinal canal]. Zh Vopr Neirokhir Im N N Burdenko 77(5):38–43; discussion 43

Reason for exclusion: Other study designs.

  1. 27.

    Thomas SA (2003). Spinal stenosis: history and physical examination. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am

Reason for exclusion: Other study designs.

  1. 28.

    Tomkins-Lane CC, Quint DJ, Gabriel S, Melloh M, Haig AJ (2013) Nerve root sedimentation sign for the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis: reliability, sensitivity, and specificity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38(24):E1554–E1560. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0b013e3182a8c2da

Reason for exclusion: Included diagnostic accuracy of tests not related to the scope of this review.

  1. 29.

    Yamada H, Oka H, Iwasaki H, Endo T, Kioka M, Ishimoto Y, Nagata K, Takiguchi N, Hashizume H, Minamide A, Nakagawa Y, Kawai M, Tsutsui S, Yoshida M (2015) Development of a support tool for the clinical diagnosis of symptomatic lumbar intra- and/or extra-foraminal stenosis. J Orthop Sci 20(5):811–817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-015-0743-3

Reason for exclusion: Other study designs.

  1. 30.

    Zhang L, Chen R, Liu B, Zhang W, Zhu Y, Rong L (2017) The nerve root sedimentation sign for differential diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective, consecutive cohort study. Eur Spine J 26(10):2512–2519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4435-2

Reason for exclusion: Included diagnostic accuracy of tests not related to the scope of this review.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cook, C.J., Cook, C.E., Reiman, M.P. et al. Systematic review of diagnostic accuracy of patient history, clinical findings, and physical tests in the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 29, 93–112 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-06048-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-06048-4

Keywords

  • Accuracy
  • Diagnostic
  • Low back pain
  • Stenosis
  • Systematic review