Cargando…

Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Global sagittal balance, describing the vertical alignment of the spine, is an important factor in the non-operative and operative management of back pain. However, the typical gold standard method of assessment, radiography, requires exposure to radiation and increased cost, making it u...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cohen, Larry, Kobayashi, Sarah, Simic, Milena, Dennis, Sarah, Refshauge, Kathryn, Pappas, Evangelos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5625601/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29026895
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13013-017-0135-x
_version_ 1783268411690713088
author Cohen, Larry
Kobayashi, Sarah
Simic, Milena
Dennis, Sarah
Refshauge, Kathryn
Pappas, Evangelos
author_facet Cohen, Larry
Kobayashi, Sarah
Simic, Milena
Dennis, Sarah
Refshauge, Kathryn
Pappas, Evangelos
author_sort Cohen, Larry
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Global sagittal balance, describing the vertical alignment of the spine, is an important factor in the non-operative and operative management of back pain. However, the typical gold standard method of assessment, radiography, requires exposure to radiation and increased cost, making it unsuitable for repeated use. Non-radiologic methods of assessment are available, but their reliability and validity in the current literature have not been systematically assessed. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to synthesise and evaluate the reliability and validity of non-radiographic methods of assessing global sagittal balance. METHODS: Five electronic databases were searched and methodology evaluated by two independent reviewers using the13-item, reliability and validity, Brink and Louw critical appraisal tool. RESULTS: Fourteen articles describing six methodologies were identified from 3940 records. The six non-radiographic methodologies were biophotogrammetry, plumbline, surface topography, infra-red motion analysis, spinal mouse and ultrasound. Construct validity was evaluated for surface topography (R = 0.49 and R = 0.68, p < 0.001), infra-red motion-analysis (ICC = 0.81) and plumbline testing (ICC = 0.83). Reliability ranged from moderate (ICC = 0.67) for spinal mouse to very high for surface topography (Cronbach α = 0.985). Measures of agreement ranged from 0.9 mm (plumbline) to 22.94 mm (infra-red motion-analysis). Variability in study populations, reporting parameters and statistics prevented a meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The reliability and validity of the non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance was reported within 14 identified articles. Based on this limited evidence, non-radiographic methods appear to have moderate to very high reliability and limited to three methodologies, moderate to high validity. The overall quality and methodological approaches of the included articles were highly variable. Further research should focus on the validity of non-radiographic methods with a greater adherence to reporting actual and clinically relevant measures of agreement.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5625601
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56256012017-10-12 Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review Cohen, Larry Kobayashi, Sarah Simic, Milena Dennis, Sarah Refshauge, Kathryn Pappas, Evangelos Scoliosis Spinal Disord Review BACKGROUND: Global sagittal balance, describing the vertical alignment of the spine, is an important factor in the non-operative and operative management of back pain. However, the typical gold standard method of assessment, radiography, requires exposure to radiation and increased cost, making it unsuitable for repeated use. Non-radiologic methods of assessment are available, but their reliability and validity in the current literature have not been systematically assessed. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to synthesise and evaluate the reliability and validity of non-radiographic methods of assessing global sagittal balance. METHODS: Five electronic databases were searched and methodology evaluated by two independent reviewers using the13-item, reliability and validity, Brink and Louw critical appraisal tool. RESULTS: Fourteen articles describing six methodologies were identified from 3940 records. The six non-radiographic methodologies were biophotogrammetry, plumbline, surface topography, infra-red motion analysis, spinal mouse and ultrasound. Construct validity was evaluated for surface topography (R = 0.49 and R = 0.68, p < 0.001), infra-red motion-analysis (ICC = 0.81) and plumbline testing (ICC = 0.83). Reliability ranged from moderate (ICC = 0.67) for spinal mouse to very high for surface topography (Cronbach α = 0.985). Measures of agreement ranged from 0.9 mm (plumbline) to 22.94 mm (infra-red motion-analysis). Variability in study populations, reporting parameters and statistics prevented a meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The reliability and validity of the non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance was reported within 14 identified articles. Based on this limited evidence, non-radiographic methods appear to have moderate to very high reliability and limited to three methodologies, moderate to high validity. The overall quality and methodological approaches of the included articles were highly variable. Further research should focus on the validity of non-radiographic methods with a greater adherence to reporting actual and clinically relevant measures of agreement. BioMed Central 2017-10-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5625601/ /pubmed/29026895 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13013-017-0135-x Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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 Review
Cohen, Larry
Kobayashi, Sarah
Simic, Milena
Dennis, Sarah
Refshauge, Kathryn
Pappas, Evangelos
Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review
title Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review
title_full Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review
title_fullStr Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review
title_short Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review
title_sort non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5625601/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29026895
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13013-017-0135-x
work_keys_str_mv AT cohenlarry nonradiographicmethodsofmeasuringglobalsagittalbalanceasystematicreview
AT kobayashisarah nonradiographicmethodsofmeasuringglobalsagittalbalanceasystematicreview
AT simicmilena nonradiographicmethodsofmeasuringglobalsagittalbalanceasystematicreview
AT dennissarah nonradiographicmethodsofmeasuringglobalsagittalbalanceasystematicreview
AT refshaugekathryn nonradiographicmethodsofmeasuringglobalsagittalbalanceasystematicreview
AT pappasevangelos nonradiographicmethodsofmeasuringglobalsagittalbalanceasystematicreview