AIM: The aim of this study is to prove the intra- and interobserver reliability of three different methods to measure the active range-of-motion in the forearm. METHODS: These three different methods were tested on forty volunteers. In the first method pictures were made in full supination and pronation, measurement of the two angles was performed with a dedicated software. Active range-of-motion was defined as the magnitude of forearm rotation between maximum pronation and supination. The second method used a standard goniometer. The third method of assessment used a gravity goniometer (plurimeter). We randomised both the side of the patient to be examined and the sequence of the methods. Two examiners measured subsequently the range-of-motion twice with these three devices. RESULTS: We found a significant intraobserver reproducibility with the gravity goniometer. There was no significance with the goniometer or pictures. The intraobserver reproducibility of the latter two methods was poor. The interobserver reproducibility of the gravity goniometer and pictures was significant, for the goniometer it was poor. Agreement between the pictures and gravity goniometer assessment of the range-of-motion was good. None of these two methods was significantly correlated with the goniometer assessment. CONCLUSION: For reproducibility of measurement of range-of-motion in the forearm the gravity goniometer is the best method, although the measured values were 5 % greater.
RCT Entities:
AIM: The aim of this study is to prove the intra- and interobserver reliability of three different methods to measure the active range-of-motion in the forearm. METHODS: These three different methods were tested on forty volunteers. In the first method pictures were made in full supination and pronation, measurement of the two angles was performed with a dedicated software. Active range-of-motion was defined as the magnitude of forearm rotation between maximum pronation and supination. The second method used a standard goniometer. The third method of assessment used a gravity goniometer (plurimeter). We randomised both the side of the patient to be examined and the sequence of the methods. Two examiners measured subsequently the range-of-motion twice with these three devices. RESULTS: We found a significant intraobserver reproducibility with the gravity goniometer. There was no significance with the goniometer or pictures. The intraobserver reproducibility of the latter two methods was poor. The interobserver reproducibility of the gravity goniometer and pictures was significant, for the goniometer it was poor. Agreement between the pictures and gravity goniometer assessment of the range-of-motion was good. None of these two methods was significantly correlated with the goniometer assessment. CONCLUSION: For reproducibility of measurement of range-of-motion in the forearm the gravity goniometer is the best method, although the measured values were 5 % greater.
Authors: Christina Theisen; Ad van Wagensveld; Nina Timmesfeld; Turgay Efe; Thomas J Heyse; Susanne Fuchs-Winkelmann; Markus D Schofer Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2010-06-29 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Michael W Maier; Mirjam Niklasch; Thomas Dreher; Felix Zeifang; Oliver Rettig; Matthias C Klotz; Sebastian I Wolf; Philip Kasten Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2014-07-21 Impact factor: 2.362