SI joint problem (Full Version)

All Forums >> [RehabEdge Forum] >> Orthopedics



Message

AlmostThere -> SI joint problem (April 11, 2008 11:16:46 PM)

I am a student and trying to understand the SI joint, but not really getting anywhere. Can anyone explain some of the common pathologies for the SI joint or direct me to a good resource?

Thank you very much!

Sorry if this is in the wrong forum. I couldnt decide if it should go in the students or othro forum. [:D]



annpsu25 -> RE: SI joint problem (April 11, 2008 11:23:59 PM)

AlmostThere-

I am a student as well, this post could go in either forum!  I am not very familiar with SI joint pathogies.  However, Wikipedia has great anatomy pictures and I am always referring to this website for any questions I may have regarding joints, muscles, ligaments, nerves, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacroiliac_joint

Hope this helps! [:D]



proud -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 7:15:55 AM)

Uhmm,

Guys, Wik should really never be a reference for a professional. Using someone like Diane Lee would be a better start. She has a textbook which is quite well done. Here is an article of her's:

http://dianelee.ca/articles/RecentAdvancesoftheSIJl.pdf



annpsu25 -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 7:32:51 AM)

Proud-

I'm sorry, I should have specified more.  I do not take any information from the website regarding pathologies.  I look at the pictures as a reference.
Thanks for the article!



I also find this website helpful:

http://www.getbodysmart.com/



OAK -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 11:32:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: proud

Uhmm,

Guys, Wik should really never be a reference for a professional. Using someone like Diane Lee would be a better start. She has a textbook which is quite well done. Here is an article of her's:

http://dianelee.ca/articles/RecentAdvancesoftheSIJl.pdf



Couldn't agree more!



TexasOrtho -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 11:38:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: proud

Uhmm,

Guys, Wik should really never be a reference for a professional. Using someone like Diane Lee would be a better start. She has a textbook which is quite well done. Here is an article of her's:

http://dianelee.ca/articles/RecentAdvancesoftheSIJl.pdf


I disagree here Proud. I think Wik can be a reference but shouldn't be the only reference.  We all use levels of evidence whether they be tradition, authority, or peer-reivewed.  It's a matter of the degree to which you use it.  Sorry if that sounds nit-picky...wiki can be a good starting point. 

I'm probably just being too nerdy with selection of words again...



proud -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 1:22:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TexasOrtho

quote:

ORIGINAL: proud

Uhmm,

Guys, Wik should really never be a reference for a professional. Using someone like Diane Lee would be a better start. She has a textbook which is quite well done. Here is an article of her's:

http://dianelee.ca/articles/RecentAdvancesoftheSIJl.pdf


I disagree here Proud. I think Wik can be a reference but shouldn't be the only reference.  We all use levels of evidence whether they be tradition, authority, or peer-reivewed.  It's a matter of the degree to which you use it.  Sorry if that sounds nit-picky...wiki can be a good starting point. 

I'm probably just being too nerdy with selection of words again...


Interesting. And I thought about it. But I'm going to disagree with you there Rod.

We are professionals. This was a student asking for some reference material.

If the question had been asked on a general information page like Yahoo....perhaps someone without knowledge would supply wik as a place to go.

Wik is often wrought with error. It should NEVER be a reference for a professional. Professionals are meant to maintain a standard...a high standard.




OAK -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 2:27:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TexasOrtho

quote:

ORIGINAL: proud

Uhmm,

Guys, Wik should really never be a reference for a professional. Using someone like Diane Lee would be a better start. She has a textbook which is quite well done. Here is an article of her's:

http://dianelee.ca/articles/RecentAdvancesoftheSIJl.pdf


I disagree here Proud. I think Wik can be a reference but shouldn't be the only reference.  We all use levels of evidence whether they be tradition, authority, or peer-reivewed.  It's a matter of the degree to which you use it.  Sorry if that sounds nit-picky...wiki can be a good starting point. 

I'm probably just being too nerdy with selection of words again...


Hey Texas, read this quote from wiki's definition of Physical Therapy:

"For decades, physical therapy practice has been the subject of criticism for its lack of a research base.[11] In a late 1990s survey of English and Australian physical therapists, fewer than five percent (5%) of survey respondents indicated that they regularly reviewed scientific literature to guide practice decisions.[12][13] Despite an overall positive attitude towards evidence based practice,[14] most physical therapists utilized treatment techniques with little scientific support.[12][15][16][17][18] Although numerous calls have been made for a shift toward the use of research and scientific evidence to guide practice decisions, at least throughout the 1990s, "most physical therapists continued to base practice decisions largely on anecdotal evidence."["


Would you say this is accurate?



TexasOrtho -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 2:40:03 PM)

OAK. I cannot attest to it's accuracy, but it certainly sounds reasonable.  A great many PT's (myself included at times) base their practice patterns too much on tradition and authority more than evidence.

Proud.  I think I was quibbling over semantics and it got me into trouble.  I certainly don't use Wiki as a reference for my daily practice as it is indeed frought with errors.  In other words, it's hardly "best evidence".  I think it's sound advice to steer students away from this resource as much as possible.  I tell students to check it out and see if it is conisistent with other, more highly regarded sources.  Again sorry for the confusion on that as I think we probably agree to a large extent on this.



PTupdate.com -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 3:13:00 PM)

OAK:  Sounds pretty accurate to me!



OAK -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 4:09:46 PM)

I can't believe that a PT would reference something that slams our profession.  If you truely believe that that paragraph is accurate, it's time to move on to another profession.




SJBird55 -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 4:57:38 PM)

Oak, I do believe that reference might be accurate.  Many in our profession are complacent.  What do we do?  Are we really ready for a true direct access situation?  When I read that there a quite a few therapists that don't even take blood pressure and pulse... yikes!  Many in our profession are not members of our association.  How the heck do those therapists maintain their competence?  What do they read?  Scary...



TexasOrtho -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 5:10:03 PM)

quote:

do we do? Are we really ready for a true direct access situation? When I read
quote:

ORIGINAL: OAK

I can't believe that a PT would reference something that slams our profession.  If you truely believe that that paragraph is accurate, it's time to move on to another profession.




OAK.  I respectfully disagree.  What if the "slamming" is true?  I don't believe we get anywhere without questioning or criticizing ourselves on a consistent basis.  Your answer to that is that we should move on to another profession?  I hope I'm misunderstanding your post.



proud -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 7:48:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: OAK

quote:

ORIGINAL: TexasOrtho

quote:

ORIGINAL: proud

Uhmm,

Guys, Wik should really never be a reference for a professional. Using someone like Diane Lee would be a better start. She has a textbook which is quite well done. Here is an article of her's:

http://dianelee.ca/articles/RecentAdvancesoftheSIJl.pdf


I disagree here Proud. I think Wik can be a reference but shouldn't be the only reference.  We all use levels of evidence whether they be tradition, authority, or peer-reivewed.  It's a matter of the degree to which you use it.  Sorry if that sounds nit-picky...wiki can be a good starting point. 

I'm probably just being too nerdy with selection of words again...


Hey Texas, read this quote from wiki's definition of Physical Therapy:

"For decades, physical therapy practice has been the subject of criticism for its lack of a research base.[11] In a late 1990s survey of English and Australian physical therapists, fewer than five percent (5%) of survey respondents indicated that they regularly reviewed scientific literature to guide practice decisions.[12][13] Despite an overall positive attitude towards evidence based practice,[14] most physical therapists utilized treatment techniques with little scientific support.[12][15][16][17][18] Although numerous calls have been made for a shift toward the use of research and scientific evidence to guide practice decisions, at least throughout the 1990s, "most physical therapists continued to base practice decisions largely on anecdotal evidence."["


Would you say this is accurate?



Sadly, this may be accurate( see the ASTYM thread[:D][:D]).

But if you read the entire Physical therapy description over at Wik.  It's really quite bad. For example in the first para:

"...Despite this, various alternative health professions continue to employ the use of some physical therapeutic modalities in practice...."

Okay. The wording is terrible. Makes us look like we just hook people up to things.

Sorry guys. Wik is not a reference. I can't even believe it's a debate.



SJBird55 -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 9:52:43 PM)

proud, cut some slack.  Allisha suggested Wik as a reference.  She's a PTA student - she was trying to be helpful. 

There are certain things Wik is great at:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clooney  I never knew all that stuff!  [8D]  Oh, and I know it is SOOO reliable.  I wonder if George goes on and adds or deletes to keep it true?  Hmmmm...

You're not being nice referencing the ASTYM thread either.  Why are you being so disagreeable??  Have a seat on my couch, proud... what's going on?



proud -> RE: SI joint problem (April 12, 2008 11:58:19 PM)

quote:



proud, cut some slack.  Allisha suggested Wik as a reference.  She's a PTA student - she was trying to be helpful.
 

Yes and I was trying to be helpful by suggesting WIK is not all that relaible.
No disrespect to Allisha.


quote:

You're not being nice referencing the ASTYM thread either.  Why are you being so disagreeable??  Have a seat on my couch, proud... what's going on?


What, now I'm Sigmund?







SJBird55 -> RE: SI joint problem (April 13, 2008 7:35:59 AM)

No, proud... see, you're the one with the "problem" and I can help you out.  Maybe I can.  LOL  [;)]



JSPT -> RE: SI joint problem (April 13, 2008 8:38:03 AM)

So...back to answering the question that started this thread!

I would look at the publication on the SI joint put out by the Orthopedic Section:

The Pelvis and Sacroiliac Joint: Physical Therapy Patient Management Utilizing Current Evidence—Michael T. Cibulka, PT, DPT, MHS, OCS
Found at: http://www.orthopt.org/162.php

If that isn't adequate or you don't have access to it, PM me and I can send you a few things.



rwillcott -> RE: SI joint problem (April 13, 2008 11:31:43 AM)

I would also get ahold of Joshua Cleland's text.  He has a great chapter on the SI joint. 

Also, I would recommend this article by Laslett et al:

http://www.physiotherapy.asn.au/AJP/vol_49/2/AustJPhysiotherv49i2Laslett.pdf




annpsu25 -> RE: SI joint problem (April 13, 2008 9:10:14 PM)

No disrespect taken Proud. =)

Very interesting to see all of your responses!  Would have never thought referencing Wiki would spark such controversy! 

But as I stated before, we are discouraged ("we" as in, my class) from using Wiki as a reference.  However, they do encourage using Wiki's anatomy pictures as supplemental material in our studies.

I have yet to find a good article or study on SI joint pathologies.  I have access to many resources as a student.  I'm going to keep looking and will post the article(s) if I should come upon one that is relevant.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode

0.063