ESTIMATION OF NORMAL LUMBAR FLEXION WITH SURFACE INCLINOMETRY - A COMPARISON OF 3 METHODS

被引:37
|
作者
RONDINELLI, R
MURPHY, J
ESLER, A
MARCIANO, T
CHOLMAKJIAN, C
机构
[1] UNIV COLORADO,SCH MED,DEPT PREVENT MED & BIOMETR,DENVER,CO 80202
[2] SACRED HEART HOSP & HLTH CTR,HANFORD,CA
[3] ASSOCIATED HLTH FOCUS,SALINAS,CA
关键词
INTRARATER RELIABILITY; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; INCLINOMETRY; LUMBAR SPINAL FLEXION; IMPAIRMENT DETERMINATION;
D O I
10.1097/00002060-199208000-00004
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
The purpose of this study was to determine the magnitude and clinical significance of surface measurement error in the determination of lumbar spinal flexion. Intrarater, inter-rater and intermethod reliability estimates were obtained using single inclinometry, double inclinometry and back range-of-motion inclinometry methods. Eight healthy subjects were examined independently by two experienced observers and three replicates of each measurement were obtained by each observer in a random sequence. In addition, three replicates of lumbar flexion angles were obtained for each subject by a single observer using the B-200. Reliability estimates were determined by intraclass correlation coefficients and were further compared by paired t tests between observation series. The median range of error was 8.5-degrees using the single inclinometer, 10.5-degrees using the double inclinometer and 16' using the back range-of-motion. The intrarater reliability was generally higher than inter-rater reliability and intermethod reliability was low in most cases reflecting the poor cross-validity across inclinometry methods and between each inclinometry method and the B-200. In conclusion, significant measurement error in estimating lumbar flexion by inclinometry may be expected to occur even in a "controlled" setting using experienced observers, standard examination techniques and asymptomatic healthy subjects. These findings appear to undermine the expectation that the clinician can reliably apply surface inclinometry to estimate loss of spinal mobility for purposes of impairment determination.
引用
收藏
页码:219 / 224
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Reliability of three landmarking methods for dual inclinometry measurements of lumbar flexion and extension
    Joy C MacDermid
    Vanitha Arumugam
    Joshua I Vincent
    Kimberly L Payne
    Aubrey K So
    BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 16
  • [2] Reliability of three landmarking methods for dual inclinometry measurements of lumbar flexion and extension
    MacDermid, Joy C.
    Arumugam, Vanitha
    Vincent, Joshua I.
    Payne, Kimberly L.
    So, Aubrey K.
    BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2015, 16
  • [3] Comparison of Two Handheld Digital Dual Inclinometry Techniques in the Measurement of Lumbar Flexion Active Range of Motion
    Fletcher, James P.
    Taylor, James David
    Carroll, Chris A.
    Richardson, M. Blake
    JOURNAL OF SPORT REHABILITATION, 2021, 30 (02) : 339 - 342
  • [4] Comparison of Surface Normal Estimation Methods for Range Sensing Applications
    Klasing, Klaas
    Althoff, Daniel
    Wollherr, Dirk
    Buss, Martin
    ICRA: 2009 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION, VOLS 1-7, 2009, : 1977 - 1982
  • [5] FLEXION AND EXTENSION RADIOGRAPHY OF THE LUMBAR SPINE - A COMPARISON WITH LUMBAR DISCOGRAPHY
    QUINNELL, RC
    STOCKDALE, HR
    CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 1983, 34 (04) : 405 - 411
  • [6] EXTENSION-FLEXION RADIOGRAPHS FOR MOTION STUDIES OF THE LUMBAR SPINE A COMPARISON OF 2 METHODS
    PUTTO, E
    TALLROTH, K
    SPINE, 1990, 15 (02) : 107 - 110
  • [7] Comparison of porcine and human lumbar spine flexion mechanics
    Dickey, JP
    Dumas, GA
    Bednar, DA
    VETERINARY AND COMPARATIVE ORTHOPAEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2003, 16 (01) : 44 - 49
  • [8] A COMPARISON OF THE TORSIONAL STIFFNESS OF THE LUMBAR SPINE IN FLEXION AND EXTENSION
    Garges, Kim J.
    Nourbakhsh, Ali
    Morris, Randall
    Yang, Jinping
    Mody, Milan
    Patterson, Rita
    JOURNAL OF MANIPULATIVE AND PHYSIOLOGICAL THERAPEUTICS, 2008, 31 (08) : 563 - 569
  • [9] A comparison of local surface geometry estimation methods
    McIvor, AM
    Valkenburg, RJ
    MACHINE VISION AND APPLICATIONS, 1997, 10 (01) : 17 - 26
  • [10] A comparison of local surface geometry estimation methods
    Alan M. McIvor
    Robert J. Valkenburg
    Machine Vision and Applications, 1997, 10 : 17 - 26