| Literature DB >> 32450918 |
Karthik V Hariharan1, Lauren Terhorst2, Matthew D Maxwell3, Christopher G Bise4, Michael G Timko4,5, Michael J Schneider4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Following head and neck trauma, the involvement of the cranio-cervical junction (CCJ) and its contribution to a patients transition to chronic pain, is poorly understood. The detection of hypermobility in this region is dependent on clinical examination and static imaging modalities such as x-ray, CT and MRI. Sagittal plane hypermobility of the CCJ is evaluated using saggital view, flexion-extension cervical radiographs. Frontal plane hypermobility is typically assessed using lateral bending and open mouth cervical radiographs. Unfortunately there is no established reliability surrounding the use of these measures. This study explores the reliability of radiographic measurements of lateral-bending open-mouth cervical radiographs.Entities:
Keywords: Cervical spine injury; Craniocervical junction; Hypermobility; Instability; Radiography
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32450918 PMCID: PMC7249371 DOI: 10.1186/s12998-020-00317-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chiropr Man Therap ISSN: 2045-709X
Fig. 1Open mouth Anteroposterior Lateral bending cervical spine radiographs in neutral (a); right side bending (b); left side bending (c) [20]
Fig. 2Open Mouth Lateral bending cervical spine radiographs with measures recorded. a midline of Dens to right lateral mass; b midline of Dens to left lateral mass; c width between lateral mass; dr: Right lateral mass step-off; dl: left lateral mass step-off
Fig. 3Radiological data form
Summary of all kappa statistics for all dichotomous variables
| Item | Raters 1 & 2 | Raters 3 & 4 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| κ | % Agree | κ | % Agree | |
| Image Satisfactory | .278 | 64.8 | .393 | 68.6 |
| Spinous Position | .641 | 84.3 | .537 | 84.3 |
| Asymmetry of Odontoid-Lateral Mass | .424 | 74.4 | .698 | 91.3 |
| Normal spinous movement -right | aN/C | 81.8 | aN/C | 97.9 |
| Normal spinous movement-left | aN/C | 97.1 | aN/C | 97.9 |
| Midline of dens to right lateral mass | .393 | 67.5 | .424 | 72.5 |
| Midline of dens to left lateral mass | .302 | 62.2 | .697 | 85.7 |
| step off right | .566 | 78.6 | .465 | 75.6 |
| step off left | .778 | 89.2 | .665 | 84.4 |
aN/C Not Calculated. The extremely high prevalence of normal spinous movement during lateral bending confounded the calculation of kappa statistics for this measurement
Summary of all ICC statistics for all continuous variables
| M | Raters 1, 2 | 95% CI | Raters 3, 4 | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AP Midline of dens to right lateral mass | .913 | (.841, .952) | .925 | (.864, .958) |
| AP Midline of dens to left lateral mass | .935 | (.883, .965) | .927 | (.869, .960) |
| AP Width | .929 | (.871, .961) | .867 | (.760, .926) |
| AP step off right | .581 | (.238, .770) | .892 | (.805, .940) |
| AP step off left | .768 | (.574, .873) | .880 | (.784, .934) |
| RLF Midline of dens to the right lateral mass | .922 | (.854, .958) | .949 | (.904, .973) |
| RLF Midline of dens to the left lateral mass | .934 | (.878, .964) | .928 | (.867, .961) |
| RLF Width | .943 | (.894, .969) | .954 | (.914, .976) |
| RLF step off right | .882 | (.784, .936) | .941 | (.893, .967) |
| RLF step off left | .748 | (.532, .865) | .799 | (.632, .890) |
| LLF Midline dens to the left lateral mass | .830 | (.689, .907) | .854 | (.731, .921) |
| LLF Midline dens to the right lateral mass | .859 | (.741, .923) | .785 | (.611, .881) |
| LLF Width | .908 | (.830, .950) | .921 | (.854, .957) |
| LLF step off right | .556 | (.153, .767) | .792 | (.625, .885) |
| LLF step off left | .884 | (.785, .938) | .968 | (.942, .982) |