Abstract：
BACKGROUND: This study was aimed at assessing the accuracy of provocative tests in diagnosis of acute or chronic Cervical Radiculopathy (CR) based on an electrodiagnostic reference criterion.
METHODS: Shoulder Abduction Test (SAT), Spurling Test (ST), Upper Limb Tension Test (ULTT), and electromyography were done on 97 patients who referred to Electrodiagnostic center in the university hospital from January 2010 to March 2011. All of the participants had neck and radicular pain for at least 3 weeks. They were classified according to electrodiagnostic findings. Then diagnostic values of provocative tests were assessed in diagnosis of acute or chronic CR on the basis of reference criterion.
RESULTS: SAT and ST were more specific (85%) compared to ULTT, while ULTT was more sensitive (60.46% in acute and 35.29% in chronic) than the other two. SAT and ST had a significant accuracy for comparison between acute and chronic CR (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: ULTT is suitable for screening of CR, while SAT and ST can support diagnosis. SAT and ST are good diagnostic tests for comparison between acute and chronic CR.
METHODS: Shoulder Abduction Test (SAT), Spurling Test (ST), Upper Limb Tension Test (ULTT), and electromyography were done on 97 patients who referred to Electrodiagnostic center in the university hospital from January 2010 to March 2011. All of the participants had neck and radicular pain for at least 3 weeks. They were classified according to electrodiagnostic findings. Then diagnostic values of provocative tests were assessed in diagnosis of acute or chronic CR on the basis of reference criterion.
RESULTS: SAT and ST were more specific (85%) compared to ULTT, while ULTT was more sensitive (60.46% in acute and 35.29% in chronic) than the other two. SAT and ST had a significant accuracy for comparison between acute and chronic CR (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: ULTT is suitable for screening of CR, while SAT and ST can support diagnosis. SAT and ST are good diagnostic tests for comparison between acute and chronic CR.
摘要：
背景：本研究旨在根据电诊断参考标准评估急性或慢性神经根病（CR）诊断的挑衅性测试的准确性。
方法：肩折试验（SAT），PurlingTest(ST),上肢张力测试(ULTT),对2010年1月至2011年3月转诊至大学医院电诊断中心的97例患者进行了肌电图检查。所有参与者都有颈部和神经根疼痛至少3周。根据电诊断结果对它们进行分类。然后根据参考标准评估激发试验在急性或慢性CR诊断中的诊断价值。
结果：与ULTT相比，SAT和ST更具体（85％），而ULTT比其他两种更敏感(急性60.46%，慢性35.29%)。SAT和ST在急性和慢性CR之间的比较具有显着准确性（P<0.05）。
结论：ULTT适用于CR的筛查，而SAT和ST可以支持诊断。SAT和ST是比较急性和慢性CR的良好诊断测试。
方法：肩折试验（SAT），PurlingTest(ST),上肢张力测试(ULTT),对2010年1月至2011年3月转诊至大学医院电诊断中心的97例患者进行了肌电图检查。所有参与者都有颈部和神经根疼痛至少3周。根据电诊断结果对它们进行分类。然后根据参考标准评估激发试验在急性或慢性CR诊断中的诊断价值。
结果：与ULTT相比，SAT和ST更具体（85％），而ULTT比其他两种更敏感(急性60.46%，慢性35.29%)。SAT和ST在急性和慢性CR之间的比较具有显着准确性（P<0.05）。
结论：ULTT适用于CR的筛查，而SAT和ST可以支持诊断。SAT和ST是比较急性和慢性CR的良好诊断测试。
