Cervical spine ROM measurements: optimizing the testing protocol by using a 3D ultrasound-based motion analysis system

被引:48
作者
Strimpakos, N
Sakellari, V
Gioftsos, G
Papathanasiou, M
Brountzos, E
Kelekis, D
Kapreli, E
Oldham, J
机构
[1] Univ Manchester, Ctr Rehabilit Sci, Manchester M13 9WL, Lancs, England
[2] TEI Lamias, Dept Physiotherapy, Athens, Greece
[3] Natl & Kapodistrian Univ Athens, Dept Radiol, Athens, Greece
关键词
range of motion; mobility; cervical spine; reliability; validity;
D O I
10.1111/j.1468-2982.2005.00970.x
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
The aim of this study was to evaluate the intra- and inter-examiner reliability and validity of neck range of motion (ROM) measurements. Thirty-five healthy subjects were assessed in all neck movements from two initial positions, sitting and standing, actively (open and closed eyes) and passively by using a 3D ultrasound-based motion analysis device (Zebris). Three tests were employed to assess intra-examiner reliability and two examiners used for the inter-examiner reliability. X-rays in neck flexion and extension were used to validate the Zebris system. The standing position yielded higher intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values (> 0.86) with less error [smallest detectable difference (SDD) < 13.8%] than sitting (ICC > 0.79, SDD < 14%). Passive assessment of neck ROM presented better reproducibility than active assessment with open or closed eyes in both positions. The inter-examiner reliability was moderate (ICC = 0.43-0.68). The correlation between the Zebris system and X-rays was high in both flexion and extension movements. The results showed that the most reliable protocol for assessment of neck ROM is a passive measurement in the standing position. The measurements were well validiated against X-rays and the experience of the investigators must be considered before any comparison among studies is employed.
引用
收藏
页码:1133 / 1145
页数:13
相关论文
共 48 条
[1]  
Aker PD, 1996, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V313, P1291
[2]   3-DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS OF NECK MOTION A CLINICAL METHOD [J].
ALUND, M ;
LARSSON, SE .
SPINE, 1990, 15 (02) :87-91
[3]  
Antonaci F, 2000, CLIN EXP RHEUMATOL, V18, pS45
[4]   STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) :307-310
[5]   The clinical course and prognostic factors of non-specific neck pain: a systematic review [J].
Borghouts, JAJ ;
Koes, BW ;
Bouter, LM .
PAIN, 1998, 77 (01) :1-13
[6]  
Bulgheroni MV, 1998, FUNCT NEUROL, V13, P239
[7]   Noninvasive three-dimensional analysis of cervical spine motion in normal subjects in relation to age and sex - An experimental examination [J].
Castro, WHM ;
Sautmann, A ;
Schilgen, M ;
Sautmann, M .
SPINE, 2000, 25 (04) :443-449
[8]   Meta-analysis of normative cervical motion [J].
Chen, J ;
Solinger, AB ;
Poncet, JF ;
Lantz, CA .
SPINE, 1999, 24 (15) :1571-1578
[9]  
Christensen HW, 1998, J MANIP PHYSIOL THER, V21, P341
[10]   THE DEVELOPMENT OF GUIDELINE FACTORS FOR THE EVALUATION OF DISABILITY IN NECK AND BACK INJURIES [J].
CLARK, W ;
HALDEMAN, S .
SPINE, 1993, 18 (13) :1736-1745