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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |