New research: No such thing as "stuck" SI joint

[neuromuscular]

Dear ALophysio:

Thank you for your reply.

I am simply trying to "think outside of the box"

First, if every joint has form closure of what benefit is this in SIJ problems for treatment? Why is this almost exclusively used for the SIJ? It is just a simple statement of fact for every joint. If there are form closure problems, what are the definative problems?

In form closure problems of the knee I CAN find information on the form closure dysfunction in the knee. I know that in form closure dysfunctions of the knee, if we use that designation, that so many will have 1: torn meniscus 2: torn ACL, 3: articular cartilage problems, etc., etc., Further, I can get a definite diagnosis of these from various texts and radiographic examinations showing speciific tests and positive results to give a definitive cause. I do not find this for the SIJ. For example, how many are linked to a specific undulation of the SIJ surface? How many are liked to a specific size related problem or shape problem? Etc. etc. etc. I do not find such documentation. There are general statements, but not a specific research related base.

Yes I do find specific dysfunction of the pelvic area in the hip ABD tests. These are innominate bone position tests as I have stated and not specific ot the SIJ except the PSIS to sacrum with hip ABD. And yes I did state the hip ABD WITH PSIS to sacrum early on in the discussion, but you either missed it or did not see its' relevance at the time and ignored it. I had done this test early on to show that the Gillett test was a problem in assessment outcomes.

I am sorry if you feel intimidated by this open and frank discussion, but I am not.

We agree that the SIJ form closuire is the lessor cause of the problems in low back pain. Yet in every manual it is given extensive coverage as if other causes were of lessor importance. In the manual which I refered to Movement, Stability and Low Back Pain In the index over 3 pages are devoted to the SIJ and another section to the sacrum, yet not a mention is made of the adductors. This is a compilation of the greatest minds of our era on the subject - that is why I refer to it. My question is: are we preoccupioed with the SIJ and not looking outside the box for better answers?

I have always thanked you for your replies. I will continue to do so. However, I find these things perplexing.

Ola Grimsby has not always agreed with me, yet he has treated the core of the ideas with respect.

Thank you again. I do not find the definative results from the load transfer, SIJ with hip flexion or torso flexion or the Gillett test. If you do, more power to you.

Best regards,

Ed