We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
REVIEW
Concordance of qualitative bone scintigraphy results with presence of clinical complex regional pain syndrome 1: meta-analysis of test accuracy studies.
European Journal of Pain : EJP 2012 November
BACKGROUND: To date, no attempt has been made to investigate the agreement between qualitative bone scintigraphy (BS) and the presence of complex regional pain syndrome 1 (CRPS 1) and the agreement between a negative BS in the absence of CRPS 1.
AIMS: To summarize the existing evidence quantifying the concordance of qualitative BS in the presence or absence of clinical CRPS 1.
DATA SOURCES: We searched Medline, Embase, Dare and the Cochrane Library and screened bibliographies of all included studies.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We selected diagnostic studies investigating the association between qualitative BS results and the clinical diagnosis of CRPS 1. The minimum requirement for inclusion was enough information to fill the two-by-two tables.
RESULTS: Twelve studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled mean sensitivity of 12 two-by-two tables was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.68-0.97) and specificity was 0.69 (95% CI, 0.47-0.85). The pooled mean sensitivity for the subgroup with clearly defined diagnostic criteria (seven two-by-two tables) was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.44-0.95) and specificity was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.40-0.91).
CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, clinicians must be advised that a positive BS is not necessarily concordant with presence of absence or CRPS 1. Given the moderate level of concordance between a positive BS in the absence of clinical CRPS 1, discordant results potentially impede the diagnosis of CRPS 1.
AIMS: To summarize the existing evidence quantifying the concordance of qualitative BS in the presence or absence of clinical CRPS 1.
DATA SOURCES: We searched Medline, Embase, Dare and the Cochrane Library and screened bibliographies of all included studies.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We selected diagnostic studies investigating the association between qualitative BS results and the clinical diagnosis of CRPS 1. The minimum requirement for inclusion was enough information to fill the two-by-two tables.
RESULTS: Twelve studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled mean sensitivity of 12 two-by-two tables was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.68-0.97) and specificity was 0.69 (95% CI, 0.47-0.85). The pooled mean sensitivity for the subgroup with clearly defined diagnostic criteria (seven two-by-two tables) was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.44-0.95) and specificity was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.40-0.91).
CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, clinicians must be advised that a positive BS is not necessarily concordant with presence of absence or CRPS 1. Given the moderate level of concordance between a positive BS in the absence of clinical CRPS 1, discordant results potentially impede the diagnosis of CRPS 1.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app