Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Practical assessment in patients suffering from musculoskeletal disorders

Praktisches Assessment bei Patienten mit dem Symptom muskuloskelettaler Schmerz

  • original article
  • Published:
Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Short review of exemplary clinical assessment methods to describe clinical evidence-based assessment for patients suffering from symptoms of musculoskeletal pain.

History and physical examination are the primary evidence-based assessment instruments for pain patients. Pain scales and questionnaire might allow assessment of different aspects of pain in order to perform an individualized therapy for pain patients.

Zusammenfassung

Kurz-Übersicht zum klinischen Untersuchungsgang und Assessment bei Patienten mit dem Symptom muskuloskelettaler Schmerz unter Berücksichtigung evidenzbasierter Gütekriterien.

Evidenzbasierte Assessmentmethoden stellen primär die Anamnese und körperliche Untersuchung dar. Diese können durch Anwendung von Skalen und Fragebögen zwecks genauerer Evaluierung mit dem Ziel der Erstellung eines individuell angepassten Therapieplans gut ergänzt werden.

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. Keilani M, Heredy U, Hartl F, et al. Assessment in der Physikalischen Medizin und Rehabilitation. Phys Med Rehab Kuror. 2014;24:266–80.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, et al. International consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported ouctomes: results of the COSMIN study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:737–45. http://www.cosmin.nl/.

  3. Manna A, Sarkar SK, Khanra LK. PA1 An internal audit into the adequacy of pain assessment in a hospice setting. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2015;5(Suppl 1):A19–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. van Tulder M, Becker A, Bekkering T, et al. Chap. 3. European guidelines for the management of acute non specific low back pain in primary care. Eur Spine J. 2006;15(Suppl 2):S169–91.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Downie A, Williams CM, Henschke N, et al. Red flags to screen for malignancy and fracture in patients with low back pain. Br J Sports Med. 2014;48:1518.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. van Tulder MW, Koes BW, Bouter LM. Conservative treatment of acute and chronic nonspecific low back pain. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of the most common interventions. Spine. 1997;22:2128–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nicholas MK, Linton SJ, Watson PJ, et al. Early identification and management of psychological risk factors (“yellow flags”) in patients with low back pain: a reappraisal. Phys Ther. 2011;91:737–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Seffinger MA, Najm WI, Mishra SI, et al. Reliability of spinal palpation for diagnosis of back and neck pain: a systematic review of the literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004;29:E413–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schneider GM, Jull G, Thomas K, et al. Intrarater and interrater reliability of select clinical tests in patients referred for diagnostic facet joint blocks in the cervical spine. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94:1628–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Robinson HS, Mengshoel AM. Assessments of lumbar flexion range of motion: intertester reliability and concurrent validity of 2 commonly used clinical tests. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39(4):E270–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ferreira-Valente MA, Pais-Ribeiro JL, Jensen MP, et al. Validity of four pain intensity rating scales. Pain. 2011;152:2399–404.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en.

  13. Wiesinger GF, Nuhr M, Quittan M, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Roland-Morris questionnaire for German-speaking patients with low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999;24:1099–103.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Osthus H, Cziske R, Jacobi E. Cross-cultural adaptation of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index and evaluation of its measurement properties. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006;31:E448–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cramer H, Lauche R, Langhorst J, et al. Validation of the German version of the Neck Disability Index (NDI). BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014;15:91.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kohlmann T, Raspe H. Hannover Functional Questionnaire in ambulatory diagnosis of functional disability caused by backache. Rehabilitation (Stuttg). 1996;35:1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Stucki G, Meier D, Stucki S, et al. Evaluation of a German version of WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMasters Universities) Arthrosis Index. Z Rheumatol. 1996;55:40–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hinman RS, Dobson F, Takla A, et al. Which is the most useful patient-reported outcome in femoroacetabular impingement? Test-retest reliability of six questionnaires. Br J Sports Med. 2014;48:458–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Offenbacher M, Ewert T, Sangha O, et al. Validation of a German version of the ‘Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand’ questionnaire (DASH-G). Z Rheumatol. 2003;62:168–277.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rocourt MH, Radlinger L, Kalberer F, et al. Evaluation of intratester and intertester reliability of the Constant-Murley shoulder assessment. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008;17:364–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cuperus N, Mahler EA, Vliet Vlieland TP, et al. Measurement properties of the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index for generalized osteoarthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2015;54:821–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Herrmann-Lingen C, Buss U, Snaith RP. Hospital anxiety and depression scale—Deutsche Version (HADS-D), 3. aktualisierte und neu normierte Aufl., Manual. Bern: Huber; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Pfingsten M, Kröner-Herwig B, Leibing E, et al. Validation of the German version of the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ). Eur J Pain. 2000;4:259–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Frettlöh J, Maier C, Gockel H, et al. Validität des Mainzer Stadienmodells der Schmerzchronifizierung bei unterschiedlichen Schmerzdiagnosen. Schmerz. 2003;17:240–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria

    Mohammad Keilani MSc & Richard Crevenna

  2. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Andrew J. Haig

Authors
  1. Mohammad Keilani MSc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrew J. Haig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Richard Crevenna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Keilani MSc.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Keilani, M., Haig, A.J. & Crevenna, R. Practical assessment in patients suffering from musculoskeletal disorders. Wien Med Wochenschr 166, 5–8 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10354-015-0411-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10354-015-0411-4

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Search

Navigation