Cargando…

Reliability of three landmarking methods for dual inclinometry measurements of lumbar flexion and extension

BACKGROUND: To examine the intra and inter-rater reliability of lumbar flexion and extension measurements attained using three landmarking methods for dual inclinometry. METHODS: This was a repeated measures reliability study. Convenience sampling was used to obtain forty volunteer subjects. Two ass...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: MacDermid, Joy C, Arumugam, Vanitha, Vincent, Joshua I, Payne, Kimberly L, So, Aubrey K
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4437685/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25989834
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0578-2
_version_ 1782372246168272896
author MacDermid, Joy C
Arumugam, Vanitha
Vincent, Joshua I
Payne, Kimberly L
So, Aubrey K
author_facet MacDermid, Joy C
Arumugam, Vanitha
Vincent, Joshua I
Payne, Kimberly L
So, Aubrey K
author_sort MacDermid, Joy C
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To examine the intra and inter-rater reliability of lumbar flexion and extension measurements attained using three landmarking methods for dual inclinometry. METHODS: This was a repeated measures reliability study. Convenience sampling was used to obtain forty volunteer subjects. Two assessors measured a series of lumbar flexion and extension movements using the J-Tech™ dual inclinometer. Three different landmarking methods were used: 1) straight palpation of PSIS and L1, 2) palpation of PSIS and the site of the nearest 5 cm interval point closest to L1 and 3) location of PSIS and 15 cm cephalad. Upon landmarking, adhesive tape was used to mark landmarks and the inclinometer was placed on sites for three trials of flexion and extension. Tape was removed and landmarks were relocated by the same assessor (intra-rater) for an additional three trials; and this process was repeated by a second assessor (inter-rater). Reliability was determined using intra-class correlation coefficients. RESULTS: Reliability within a set of three repetitions was very high (ICCs > 0.90); intra-rater reliability after relocating landmarks was high (ICCs > 0.80); reliability between therapists was moderate to high (0.60 > ICCs < 0.76). Assessment of flexion and extension movements by straight palpation of bony landmarks as in the Straight palpation of PSIS and L1 method (ICC: Flexion 0.60; Extension 0.74) was found to be marginally less reliable than the other two landmarking measurement strategies (ICC: Flexion 0.66; Extension 0.76). CONCLUSION: All three methods of land marking are reliable. We recommend the use of the PSIS to 15 cm cephalad method as used in the modified-modified Schobers test as it is the simplest to perform and aligns with current clinical practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4437685
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44376852015-05-20 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 Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: To examine the intra and inter-rater reliability of lumbar flexion and extension measurements attained using three landmarking methods for dual inclinometry. METHODS: This was a repeated measures reliability study. Convenience sampling was used to obtain forty volunteer subjects. Two assessors measured a series of lumbar flexion and extension movements using the J-Tech™ dual inclinometer. Three different landmarking methods were used: 1) straight palpation of PSIS and L1, 2) palpation of PSIS and the site of the nearest 5 cm interval point closest to L1 and 3) location of PSIS and 15 cm cephalad. Upon landmarking, adhesive tape was used to mark landmarks and the inclinometer was placed on sites for three trials of flexion and extension. Tape was removed and landmarks were relocated by the same assessor (intra-rater) for an additional three trials; and this process was repeated by a second assessor (inter-rater). Reliability was determined using intra-class correlation coefficients. RESULTS: Reliability within a set of three repetitions was very high (ICCs > 0.90); intra-rater reliability after relocating landmarks was high (ICCs > 0.80); reliability between therapists was moderate to high (0.60 > ICCs < 0.76). Assessment of flexion and extension movements by straight palpation of bony landmarks as in the Straight palpation of PSIS and L1 method (ICC: Flexion 0.60; Extension 0.74) was found to be marginally less reliable than the other two landmarking measurement strategies (ICC: Flexion 0.66; Extension 0.76). CONCLUSION: All three methods of land marking are reliable. We recommend the use of the PSIS to 15 cm cephalad method as used in the modified-modified Schobers test as it is the simplest to perform and aligns with current clinical practice. BioMed Central 2015-05-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4437685/ /pubmed/25989834 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0578-2 Text en © MacDermid et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
MacDermid, Joy C
Arumugam, Vanitha
Vincent, Joshua I
Payne, Kimberly L
So, Aubrey K
Reliability of three landmarking methods for dual inclinometry measurements of lumbar flexion and extension
title Reliability of three landmarking methods for dual inclinometry measurements of lumbar flexion and extension
title_full Reliability of three landmarking methods for dual inclinometry measurements of lumbar flexion and extension
title_fullStr Reliability of three landmarking methods for dual inclinometry measurements of lumbar flexion and extension
title_full_unstemmed Reliability of three landmarking methods for dual inclinometry measurements of lumbar flexion and extension
title_short Reliability of three landmarking methods for dual inclinometry measurements of lumbar flexion and extension
title_sort reliability of three landmarking methods for dual inclinometry measurements of lumbar flexion and extension
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4437685/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25989834
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0578-2
work_keys_str_mv AT macdermidjoyc reliabilityofthreelandmarkingmethodsfordualinclinometrymeasurementsoflumbarflexionandextension
AT arumugamvanitha reliabilityofthreelandmarkingmethodsfordualinclinometrymeasurementsoflumbarflexionandextension
AT vincentjoshuai reliabilityofthreelandmarkingmethodsfordualinclinometrymeasurementsoflumbarflexionandextension
AT paynekimberlyl reliabilityofthreelandmarkingmethodsfordualinclinometrymeasurementsoflumbarflexionandextension
AT soaubreyk reliabilityofthreelandmarkingmethodsfordualinclinometrymeasurementsoflumbarflexionandextension