Literature DB >> 14661104

A new skin-surface device for measuring the curvature and global and segmental ranges of motion of the spine: reliability of measurements and comparison with data reviewed from the literature.

Anne F Mannion1, Katrin Knecht, Gordana Balaban, Jiri Dvorak, Dieter Grob.   

Abstract

There is an increasing awareness of the risks and dangers of exposure to radiation associated with repeated radiographic assessment of spinal curvature and spinal movements. As such, attempts are continuously being made to develop skin-surface devices for use in examining the progression and response to treatment of various spinal disorders. However, the reliability and validity of measurements recorded with such devices must be established before they can be recommended for use in the research or clinical environment. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability of measurements using a newly developed skin-surface device, the Spinal Mouse. Twenty healthy volunteers (mean age 41 +/- 12 years, nine males, 11 females) took part. On 2 separate days, spinal curvature was measured with the Spinal Mouse during standing, full flexion, and full extension (each three times by each of two examiners). Paired t-tests, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and standard errors of measurement (SEM) with 95% confidence intervals were used to characterise between-day and interexaminer reliability for: standing sacral angle, lumbar lordosis, thoracic kyphosis, and ranges of motion (flexion, extension) of the thoracic spine, lumbar spine, hips, and trunk. The between-day reliability for segmental ranges of flexion was also determined for each motion segment from T1-2 to L5-S1. The majority of parameters measured for the 'global regions' (thoracic, lumbar, or hips) showed good between-day reliability. Depending on the parameter of interest, between-day ICCs ranged from 0.67 to 0.92 for examiner 1 (average 0.82) and 0.57 to 0.95 for examiner 2 (average 0.83); for 70% of the parameters measured, the ICCs were greater than 0.8 and generally highest for the lumbar spine and whole trunk measures. For lumbar spine range of flexion, the SEM was approximately 3 degrees. The ICCs were also good for the interexaminer comparisons, ranging from 0.62 to 0.93 on day 1 (average 0.81) and 0.70 to 0.94 on day 2 (average 0.86), although small systematic differences were sometimes observed in their mean values. The latter were still evident even if both examiners used the same skin markings. For segmental ranges of flexion, the ICCs varied between vertebral levels but overall were lower than for the global measures (average for all levels in all analyses, ICC 0.6). For each examiner, the average between-day SEM over all vertebral levels was approximately 2 degrees. For 'global' regions of the spine, the Spinal Mouse delivered consistently reliable values for standing curvatures and ranges of motion which compared well with those reported in the literature. This suggests that the device can be reliably implemented for in vivo studies of the sagittal profile and range of motion of the spine. As might be expected for the smaller angles being measured, the segmental ranges of flexion showed lower reliability. Their usefulness with regard to the interpretation of individual results and the detection of 'real change' on an individual basis thus remains questionable. Nonetheless, the group mean values showed few between-day differences, suggesting that the device may still be of use in providing clinically interesting data on segmental motion when examining groups of individuals with a given spinal pathology or undergoing some type of intervention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14661104      PMCID: PMC3476568          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-003-0618-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  45 in total

1.  A comparison of two motion analysis devices used in the measurement of lumbar spinal mobility.

Authors:  A Mannion; M Troke
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 2.063

Review 2.  Understanding the relevance of measured change through studies of responsiveness.

Authors:  D E Beaton
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Three-dimensional lumbar spinal kinematics: a study of range of movement in 100 healthy subjects aged 20 to 60+ years.

Authors:  G Van Herp; P Rowe; P Salter; J P Paul
Journal:  Rheumatology (Oxford)       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 7.580

4.  Can exercise therapy improve the outcome of microdiscectomy?

Authors:  P Dolan; K Greenfield; R J Nelson; I W Nelson
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-06-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Functional radiographic diagnosis of the lumbar spine. Flexion-extension and lateral bending.

Authors:  J Dvorák; M M Panjabi; D G Chang; R Theiler; D Grob
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  An analysis of errors in kinematic parameters associated with in vivo functional radiographs.

Authors:  M Panjabi; D Chang; J Dvorák
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Measurement of lumbar sagittal mobility. A comparison of methods.

Authors:  P J Salisbury; R W Porter
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Application of a stereoradiographic method for the study of intervertebral motion.

Authors:  A Plamondon; M Gagnon; G Maurais
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Breast cancer mortality after diagnostic radiography: findings from the U.S. Scoliosis Cohort Study.

Authors:  M M Doody; J E Lonstein; M Stovall; D G Hacker; N Luckyanov; C E Land
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-08-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  New method for the non-invasive three-dimensional measurement of human back movement.

Authors:  M J Pearcy; R J Hindle
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 2.063

View more
  74 in total

Review 1.  The Michel Benoist and Robert Mulholland yearly European Spine Journal Review. A survey of the "medical" articles in the European Spine Journal, 2004.

Authors:  Michel Benoist
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-01-28       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  The validity and reliability of "Spinal Mouse" assessment of spinal curvatures in the frontal plane in pediatric adolescent idiopathic thoraco-lumbar curves.

Authors:  Ayse Livanelioglu; Fatma Kaya; Vugar Nabiyev; Gokhan Demirkiran; Tüzün Fırat
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Progression of postural changes in Parkinson's disease: quantitative assessment.

Authors:  Alexander Khlebtovsky; Ruth Djaldetti; Yaniv Rodity; Ofir Keret; Gloria Tsvetov; Ilana Slutzcki-Shraga; Felix Benninger
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2017-02-02       Impact factor: 4.849

4.  Preliminary study: reliability of the spinal wheel. A novel device to measure spinal postures applied to sitting and standing.

Authors:  Liba Sheeran; Valerie Sparkes; Monica Busse; Robert van Deursen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Authors' reply to the Letter to the Editor of J. Padulo et al. concerning "Video raster stereography back shape reconstruction: a reliability study for sagittal, frontal, and transversal plane parameters" by Schroeder J, Reer R, Braumann KM (2015), Eur Spine J; 24(2):262-269. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-014-3664-5.

Authors:  Jan Schroeder
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Effects of back extensor strengthening exercises on postural alignment, physical function and performance, self-efficacy, and quality of life in Japanese community-dwelling older adults: A controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Atsumi Fukuda; Eiki Tsushima; Kanichiro Wada; Yasuyuki Ishibashi
Journal:  Phys Ther Res       Date:  2020-08-05

7.  Spino-pelvic-rhythm with forward trunk bending in normal subjects without low back pain.

Authors:  Kiyotaka Hasebe; Koichi Sairyo; Yasushi Hada; Akira Dezawa; Yu Okubo; Koji Kaneoka; Yoshio Nakamura
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2013-10-12

8.  The reliability and validity of a designed setup for the assessment of static back extensor force and endurance in older women with and without hyperkyphosis.

Authors:  Taybeh Roghani; Minoo Khalkhali Zavieh; Abbas Rahimi; Saeed Talebian; Farideh Dehghan Manshadi; Alireza Akbarzadeh Baghban; Nicole King; Wendy Katzman
Journal:  Physiother Theory Pract       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 2.279

9.  Spinal postural changes during the modified Matthiass test in healthy children : Interday and interrater reliability of dynamic rasterstereographic measurements.

Authors:  Inke Marie Albertsen; Kristina Dettmann; Kornelia Babin; Ralf Stücker; Jan Schröder; Astrid Zech; Karsten Hollander
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 1.087

10.  Measurement of lumbar lordosis in static standing posture with and without high-heeled shoes.

Authors:  Brent S Russell; Kimberly A Muhlenkamp; Kathryn T Hoiriis; Carolyn M Desimone
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2012-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.