REFERENCES
- Dreyfuss PH, Michaelsen M, Pauza K, et al. The value of history and physical examination in diagnosing sacroiliac joint pain. Spine 1996; 21:2594–2602.
- Maigne JY, Aivaliklis A, Pfefer F. Results of sacroiliac joint double block and value of sacroiliac pain provocation tests in 54 patients with low back pain. Spine 1996; 21:1889–1892.
- Schwarzer AC, Aprill C, Bogduk N. The sacroiliac joint in chronic low back pain. Spine 1995; 20:31–37.
- Slipman CW, Sterenfeld EB, Chou LH, et al. The predictive value of provocative sacroiliac joint stress maneuvers in the diagnosis of sacroiliac joint syndrome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998; 79:288–292.
- Laslett M. Sensitivity and specificity of the clinical examination in low back pain. Linköping, Sweden: 6 th International Forum on LBP Research in Primary Care, 2003.
- Laslett M, Aprill CN, McDonald B, et al. Diagnosis of sacroiliac joint pain: Validity of individual provocation tests and composites of tests. Man Ther 2005; 10:207–218.
- Laslett M, Oberg B, Aprill CN, et al. Centralization as a predictor of provocation discography results in chronic low back pain, and the influence of disability and distress on diagnostic power. Spine J 2005; 5:370–380.
- Laslett M, Oberg B, Aprill CN, et al. A study of clinical predictors of lumbar discogenic pain as determined by provocation discography. Eur Spine J 2006; 15: 1473–1484.
- Laslett M. The diagnostic accuracy of the clinical examination compared to available reference standards in chronic low back pain patients. Linköpings Universitet: Faculty of Health Sciences, 2005.
- Laslett M, Aprill CN, McDonald B. Provocation sacroiliac joint tests have validity in the diagnosis of sacroiliac joint pain. Arch Phys Med Rehab 2006; 87:874–875.
- Laslett M, van der WP, Buijs E, et al. Comments on Berthelot, et al. review: “Provocative sacroiliac joint maneuvers and sacroiliac joint block are unreliable for diagnosing sacroiliac joint pain”. Joint Bone Spine 2007; 74:306–207.
- Laslett M. Evidence-based clinical testing of the lumbar spine and pelvis. In: Vleeming A, Mooney V, Stoeckart R, eds. Movement Stability and Lumbopelvic Pain: Integration of Research and Therapy. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone Elsvier, 2007.
- van der Wurff P, Buijs EJ, Groen GJ. A multitest regimen of pain provocation tests as an aid to reduce unnecessary minimally invasive sacroiliac joint procedures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2006; 87:10–14.
- Laslett M, Young SB, Aprill CN, et al. Diagnosing painful sacroiliac joints: A validity study of a McKenzie evaluation and sacroiliac joint provocation tests. Aust J Physiother 2003; 49:89–97.
- Laslett M, Williams M. The reliability of selected pain provocation tests for sacroiliac joint pathology. Spine 1994; 19:1243–1249.
- Kokmeyer DJ, van der Wurff P, Aufdem- kampe G, et al. The reliability of multitest regimens with sacroiliac pain provocation tests. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2002; 25: 42–48.
- Robinson HS, Brox JI, Robinson R, et al. The reliability of selected motion- and pain provocation tests for the sacroiliac joint. Man Ther 2007; 12:72–79.
- van der Wurff P, Hagmeijer RH, Meyne W. Clinical tests of the sacroiliac joint: A systemic methodological review. Part 1: Reliability. Man Ther 2000; 5:30–36.