Objective: Previous studies on learning joint mobilization techniques have used expert practitioners as the reference standard as there is no current evidence on what ideal forces would be for effective mobilizations. However, none of these trials have documented the reliability or accuracy of the reference standard. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to report both the reliability and accuracy of an expert physical therapist (PT) acting as a reference standard for a manual therapy joint mobilization trial. Methods: A secondary analysis was performed using data from a published randomized, controlled, crossover study. The mobilization technique studied was the central posterior to anterior (PA) joint mobilization of the L3 vertebra. Reliability and accuracy data for the reference standard were collected over four time periods spanning 16 weeks. Results:Intrarater reliability of the expert PT for R1 and R2 joint forces was excellent (R1 Force ICC3,3 0.95, 95%CI 0.76-0.99 and R2 Force ICC3,3 0.90, 95%CI 0.49-0.99). Additionally, the expert PT was 92.3% accurate (mean % error±SD, 7.7 ± 5.5) when finding Grade III mean peak mobilization force and 85.1% accurate (mean % error±SD, 14.9 ± 8.3) when finding Grade IV mean peak mobilization force. Finally, correlations between actual applied forces and computed ideal forces were excellent (Pearson r 0.79-0.92, n = 24, P < 0.01 for all correlations).Discussion: The expert PT in this manual therapy joint mobilization trial showed excellent reliability and accuracy as the reference standard. The study supports the use of implementing quantitative feedback devices into the teaching of joint mobilization when a reliable and accurate reference standard has been identified.Level of Evidence: 2b.
RCT Entities:
Objective: Previous studies on learning joint mobilization techniques have used expert practitioners as the reference standard as there is no current evidence on what ideal forces would be for effective mobilizations. However, none of these trials have documented the reliability or accuracy of the reference standard. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to report both the reliability and accuracy of an expert physical therapist (PT) acting as a reference standard for a manual therapy joint mobilization trial. Methods: A secondary analysis was performed using data from a published randomized, controlled, crossover study. The mobilization technique studied was the central posterior to anterior (PA) joint mobilization of the L3 vertebra. Reliability and accuracy data for the reference standard were collected over four time periods spanning 16 weeks. Results: Intrarater reliability of the expert PT for R1 and R2 joint forces was excellent (R1 Force ICC3,3 0.95, 95%CI 0.76-0.99 and R2 Force ICC3,3 0.90, 95%CI 0.49-0.99). Additionally, the expert PT was 92.3% accurate (mean % error±SD, 7.7 ± 5.5) when finding Grade III mean peak mobilization force and 85.1% accurate (mean % error±SD, 14.9 ± 8.3) when finding Grade IV mean peak mobilization force. Finally, correlations between actual applied forces and computed ideal forces were excellent (Pearson r 0.79-0.92, n = 24, P < 0.01 for all correlations).Discussion: The expert PT in this manual therapy joint mobilization trial showed excellent reliability and accuracy as the reference standard. The study supports the use of implementing quantitative feedback devices into the teaching of joint mobilization when a reliable and accurate reference standard has been identified.Level of Evidence: 2b.
Keywords:
Lumbar spine; force measurement; motor skills
Authors: Shady S Elmasry; Peter K Sculco; Cynthia A Kahlenberg; David J Mayman; Michael B Cross; Andrew D Pearle; Timothy M Wright; Geoffrey H Westrich; Carl W Imhauser Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2022-03-24 Impact factor: 4.755
Authors: Marie-Andrée Mercier; Philippe Rousseau; Martha Funabashi; Martin Descarreaux; Isabelle Pagé Journal: Front Pain Res (Lausanne) Date: 2021-10-29