Literature DB >> 30202788

Supplementary addendum to "Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review"; Reliability of the Spinal Mouse in adult back pain sufferers.

Larry Cohen1, Sarah Kobayashi1, Milena Simic1, Sarah Dennis1, Kathryn Refshauge1, Evangelos Pappas1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2018        PMID: 30202788      PMCID: PMC6122565          DOI: 10.1186/s13013-018-0167-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scoliosis Spinal Disord        ISSN: 2397-1789


× No keyword cloud information.
We would like to provide an update for the paper “Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review” in Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders [1] with additional data regarding the reliability of the Spinal Mouse method in evaluating global sagittal balance through trunk inclination in an adult population with back pain. We were alerted to the presence of additional data [2] fitting the inclusion criteria documenting excellent intra-rater reliability (ICC 0.845 [CI 0.679–0.925], SEM 0.803°) of the Spinal Mouse system in a population of 50 adults with back pain aged 58.4 ± 13.4 years. This reliability data is consistent with the reported results in healthy children and healthy adults. Tables 1 and 2 are updated as below.
Table 1

Methodological quality of included studies evaluated using the Brink and Louw critical appraisal tool

Key information12345678910111213High quality > 60%
Topalidou et al. 2014n/an/an/an/an/an/a4/7 = 57%

Item key: 1—description of study population, 2—description of raters, 3—explanation of reference standards (validity only) 4—between rater blinding (reliability only), 5—within rater blinding (reliability), 6—variation of testing order (reliability), 7—time period between index test and reference standard (validity), 8—time period between repeated measures (reliability), 9—independency of reference standard from index test (validity), 10—description of index test procedure, 11—description of reference test procedure (validity), 12—explanation of any withdrawals, 13—appropriate statistics methods. Legend: ✓ reported, ✘ not reported

Table 2

Study characteristics, reliability, validity and SEM data of included studies

Non-radiographic methodStudyIndex test variableSampleAgeMethodology descriptionReliability test variableStatistical measureStatistical valueSEM
Spinal MouseTopalidou et al. 2014C7-S1 Angular trunk inclination50 adults with back pain.58.4 ± 13.4 yearsExamined by1 rater on 2 separate occasions, 30 min apartIntra-raterICC0.8450.8°

SEM standard error of measurement

Methodological quality of included studies evaluated using the Brink and Louw critical appraisal tool Item key: 1—description of study population, 2—description of raters, 3—explanation of reference standards (validity only) 4—between rater blinding (reliability only), 5—within rater blinding (reliability), 6—variation of testing order (reliability), 7—time period between index test and reference standard (validity), 8—time period between repeated measures (reliability), 9—independency of reference standard from index test (validity), 10—description of index test procedure, 11—description of reference test procedure (validity), 12—explanation of any withdrawals, 13—appropriate statistics methods. Legend: ✓ reported, ✘ not reported Study characteristics, reliability, validity and SEM data of included studies SEM standard error of measurement
  2 in total

1.  Evaluation of the reliability of a new non-invasive method for assessing the functionality and mobility of the spine.

Authors:  Anastasia Topalidou; George Tzagarakis; Xenia Souvatzis; George Kontakis; Pavlos Katonis
Journal:  Acta Bioeng Biomech       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 1.073

Review 2.  Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review.

Authors:  Larry Cohen; Sarah Kobayashi; Milena Simic; Sarah Dennis; Kathryn Refshauge; Evangelos Pappas
Journal:  Scoliosis Spinal Disord       Date:  2017-10-03
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.