OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of clinical tests that are used to diagnose greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) in clinical practice. DESIGN: Diagnostic test accuracy systematic review with meta-analysis. LITERATURE SEARCH: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, and SPORTDiscus were searched using key words mapped to diagnostic test accuracy for GTPS. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies with published or derivable diagnostic accuracy data were included. DATA SYNTHESIS: Risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool, and certainty of evidence, via the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. MetaDTA "R" random-effects models were used to summarize individual and pooled data including sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and pretest/posttest probabilities. RESULTS: From a database yield of 858 studies, 23 full texts were assessed. We included 6 studies for review, involving 15 tests and 272 participants (314 hips). Overall certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Meta-analysis of 6 tests revealed sequenced test clusters able to significantly shift pretest-posttest probability for or against a GTPS diagnosis. In people reporting lateral hip pain, a negative gluteal tendon (GT) palpation test followed by a negative resisted hip abduction test significantly reduced the posttest probability of GTPS from 59% to 14%. In those with a positive GT palpation test followed by a positive resisted hip abduction test, the posttest probability of GTPS significantly shifted from 59% to 96%. CONCLUSION: The value of magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing GTPS is debated. We have identified a straightforward, clinically useful diagnostic test cluster to help confirm or refute the presence of GTPS in people reporting lateral hip pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(1):1-24. Epub 10 August 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11890.
Keywords: diagnostic test accuracy; gluteal tendinopathy; greater trochanteric pain syndrome.