STUDY DESIGN: Radiologic evaluation of lumbar range of motion (ROM) with dynamic radiograph. OBJECTIVES: To calculate 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the measurement error accompanying different methods, different observers, and different levels of training when measuring sagittal plane segmental ROM in lumbar spine. In addition, to compare the 95% CI with frequently common statistical methods of reliability analysis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Dynamic radiographs are commonly used for ROM calculation of the lumbar spine. Yet, the reliability of different measurement methods still remains unclear. METHODS: In 24 patients, levels L4-L5 and L5-S1 were measured with the Cobb and superimposition methods on flexion-extension radiographs. There were 2 experienced and 1 inexperienced observer that performed the measurements. The 95% CIs were compared with the corresponding Pearson correlation coefficient and P value (t test). RESULTS: The 95% CI of the superimposition method was +/-4.0 degrees for the experienced and +/-4.7 degrees for the inexperienced observer. The corresponding values for the Cobb method was +/-4.2 degrees for the experienced and +/-6.8 degrees for the inexperienced observer. The 95% CI for the measurement error became even worse when different methods or observers were compared, whereas a method constancy revealed superior reliability than observer constancy in experienced observers. CONCLUSIONS: For lumbar ROM measurement with dynamic radiograph, the superimposition method seems to be more reliable than the Cobb method. Study protocols dealing with ROM measurement have to calculate the 95% CI of the measurement method used because clinically valid conclusions can only be drawn with respect to these intervals.
STUDY DESIGN: Radiologic evaluation of lumbar range of motion (ROM) with dynamic radiograph. OBJECTIVES: To calculate 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the measurement error accompanying different methods, different observers, and different levels of training when measuring sagittal plane segmental ROM in lumbar spine. In addition, to compare the 95% CI with frequently common statistical methods of reliability analysis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Dynamic radiographs are commonly used for ROM calculation of the lumbar spine. Yet, the reliability of different measurement methods still remains unclear. METHODS: In 24 patients, levels L4-L5 and L5-S1 were measured with the Cobb and superimposition methods on flexion-extension radiographs. There were 2 experienced and 1 inexperienced observer that performed the measurements. The 95% CIs were compared with the corresponding Pearson correlation coefficient and P value (t test). RESULTS: The 95% CI of the superimposition method was +/-4.0 degrees for the experienced and +/-4.7 degrees for the inexperienced observer. The corresponding values for the Cobb method was +/-4.2 degrees for the experienced and +/-6.8 degrees for the inexperienced observer. The 95% CI for the measurement error became even worse when different methods or observers were compared, whereas a method constancy revealed superior reliability than observer constancy in experienced observers. CONCLUSIONS: For lumbar ROM measurement with dynamic radiograph, the superimposition method seems to be more reliable than the Cobb method. Study protocols dealing with ROM measurement have to calculate the 95% CI of the measurement method used because clinically valid conclusions can only be drawn with respect to these intervals.
Authors: Robert Gunzburg; Marek Szpalski; Stuart A Callary; Christopher J Colloca; Victor Kosmopoulos; Deed Harrison; Robert J Moore Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2009-02-07 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Saulo de Tarso de Sá Pereira Segundo; Edgar Santiago Valesin; Mario Lenza; Durval do Carmo Barros Santos; Laercio Alberto Rosemberg; Mario Ferretti Journal: Einstein (Sao Paulo) Date: 2016 Jul-Sep
Authors: Method Kabelitz; Yannick Fritz; Patrick Grueninger; Christoph Meier; Patrick Fries; Michael Dietrich Journal: Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil Date: 2018-03-29