STUDY DESIGN: This study used a validity protocol. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the criterion validity of the Cervical Range of Motion goniometer using a healthy population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The results of the 1994 study by Mayo et al show that there are no validated tools currently available for clinically measuring the cervical range of motion. Numerous decisions regarding patient status and treatment are based wholly or in part on joint motion measurements. Because of current budgetary restrictions, clinicians are being asked to justify their interventions objectively, and to do so, they will need validated tools. METHODS: The population consisted of 31 healthy participants ranging in age from 18 to 45 years. None had experienced cervical problems in the previous 3 months or were pregnant. Data collection took place at the radiology department. After participants were positioned on a stool, the cervical range of motion goniometer frame was set on their head by the physiotherapist. With the participant in this neutral position, the physiotherapist took the first Cervical Range of Motion measurement. The radiograph technologist obtained the radiograph immediately afterward. This procedure was repeated with the participant in fully flexed and fully extended positions. RESULTS: A Pearson's r correlation test was used to evaluate the criterion validity of the Cervical Range of Motion goniometer versus the radiographic method. The two measurements proved to be highly correlated (flexion: r = 0.97, P < 0.001; extension: r = 0.98, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: For this population of healthy participants, the Cervical Range of Motion goniometer was found to be valid for measurements of cervical flexion and extension. Further research is needed on the validity of this instrument for other cervical spine movements.
STUDY DESIGN: This study used a validity protocol. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the criterion validity of the Cervical Range of Motion goniometer using a healthy population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The results of the 1994 study by Mayo et al show that there are no validated tools currently available for clinically measuring the cervical range of motion. Numerous decisions regarding patient status and treatment are based wholly or in part on joint motion measurements. Because of current budgetary restrictions, clinicians are being asked to justify their interventions objectively, and to do so, they will need validated tools. METHODS: The population consisted of 31 healthy participants ranging in age from 18 to 45 years. None had experienced cervical problems in the previous 3 months or were pregnant. Data collection took place at the radiology department. After participants were positioned on a stool, the cervical range of motion goniometer frame was set on their head by the physiotherapist. With the participant in this neutral position, the physiotherapist took the first Cervical Range of Motion measurement. The radiograph technologist obtained the radiograph immediately afterward. This procedure was repeated with the participant in fully flexed and fully extended positions. RESULTS: A Pearson's r correlation test was used to evaluate the criterion validity of the Cervical Range of Motion goniometer versus the radiographic method. The two measurements proved to be highly correlated (flexion: r = 0.97, P < 0.001; extension: r = 0.98, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: For this population of healthy participants, the Cervical Range of Motion goniometer was found to be valid for measurements of cervical flexion and extension. Further research is needed on the validity of this instrument for other cervical spine movements.