Unpublished MSc thesis, Victoria University, 2003/01, 31, type of study: ,css,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Free full text   (http://vuir.vu.edu.au/928/)

Keywords:

Australia [175]
clinical reasoning [85]
cross sectional study [894]
diagnosis [412]
osteopaths [269]
sacroiliac joint [76]

Abstract:

The aim of this study was to determine what clinical tests are employed to assess for sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD) and determine whether a correlation existed between tests employed and clinical experience. The Australian Osteopathic Profession was surveyed via mail-out. The range and frequency of SIJ clinical tests used by Australian osteopaths is unknown. 168 practising osteopaths responded to the mail-out survey. Most practitioners that responded to the survey utilise asymmetry of bony landmarks, motion tests and pain provocation tests. Only 14% of respondents completely abstain from pain provocation testing. It appeared that many osteopaths used diagnostic procedures consistent with the model proposed by Mitchell and advocated by most American authors. The use of these tests declined with increasing experience, whereas the use of a wide range of “other“ tests increased. It appeared that the majority of osteopaths use some form of pain provocation tests, that are not advocated by any osteopathic text but commonly suggested in the wider manual therapy literature. This minor thesis was written by a post-graduate student as part of the requirements of the Master of Health Science (Osteopathy) program.