A preliminary report of musculoskeletal dysfunction in female chronic pelvic pain: A blinded study of examination findings

Cynthia E. Neville*, Colleen M. Fitzgerald, Trudy Mallinson, Suzanne Badillo, Christina Hynes, Frank Tu

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

23 Scopus citations

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis: Female chronic pelvic pain is prevalent and causes disability. Can women with self-reported chronic pelvic pain (CPP) be distinguished from pain-free women by demonstrating a greater number of abnormal musculoskeletal findings on examination? Methods: In this cross-sectional study, blinded examiners performed 9 physical exam maneuvers on 48 participants; 19 with CPP, and 29 pain-free. Frequency of positive findings between groups, total number of positive exam findings, cluster analysis, and sensitivity - specificity analyses were performed. Results: Women with CPP presented with significantly more abnormal findings than pain-free women. By using two examination maneuvers, examiners correctly classified women with self-reported CPP from pain-free women 85% of the time. Conclusions: Abnormal findings on musculoskeletal exam are more common in women with self-reported CPP. Women with CPP might benefit from a faster time to diagnosis and improved treatment outcomes if a musculoskeletal contribution to CPP was identified earlier.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)50-56
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies
Volume16
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2012

Keywords

  • Chronic pelvic pain
  • Diagnosis
  • Examination
  • Musculoskeletal
  • Rehabilitation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Complementary and Manual Therapy
  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
  • Rehabilitation
  • Complementary and alternative medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A preliminary report of musculoskeletal dysfunction in female chronic pelvic pain: A blinded study of examination findings'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this