Reliability and Validity of Electro-Goniometric Range of Motion Measurements in Patients with Hand and Wrist Limitations.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Study design
Cross-sectional reliability and validity study.Purpose
1. To determine intrarater, interrater and inter instrument reliabilities and validity of two digital electro goniometry to measure active wrist/finger range of motions (ROMs) in patients with limited motion. 2. To determine intrarater and interrater reliabilities of digital goniometry to measure torques of PIP passive flexion of the index finger in patients with limited motion.Methods
The study was designed in a randomized block plan on 44 patients (24 women, 20 men) with limited wrist or hand motions. Two experienced raters measured active wrist ROMs, and active and passive index PIP flexion using two digital goniometers. All measures were repeated by one rater 2-5 days after the initial measurements. The reliability measures were analyzed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs) and the construct validity was determined by correlation coefficients analysis between sub measures of scores; patient rated pain and function (PRWE) and quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (quick DASH) scores.Results
The intrarater, interrater and inter instrument reliabilities were high in most ROM measures (range 0.64-0.97) for both types of electro-goniometers. The 95% limit of agreements and Bland and Altman plots did not show progressive changes. There was a significant difference in force application between the raters when performing passive ROM measures for PIP index, but the same rater produced consistent force. Most of the NK and J-Tech ROM measures were moderately correlated with the patient rated pain and function scores (range 0.32-0.63).
SUBMITTER: Bashardoust Tajali S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4920970 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundElbow and wrist chronic conditions are very common among musculoskeletal problems. These painful conditions affect muscle function, which ultimately leads to a decrease in the joint's Range Of Motion (ROM). Due to their portability and ease of use, goniometers are still the most widespread tool for measuring ROM. Inertial sensors are emerging as a digital, low-cost and accurate alternative. However, whereas inertial sensors are commonly used in research studies, due to the lack of information about their validity and reliability, they are not widely used in the clinical practice. The goal of this study is to assess the validity and intra-inter-rater reliability of inertial sensors for measuring active ROM of the elbow and wrist.Materials and methodsMeasures were taken simultaneously with inertial sensors (Werium™ system) and a universal goniometer. The process involved two physiotherapists ("rater A" and "rater B") and an engineer responsible for the technical issues. Twenty-nine asymptomatic subjects were assessed individually in two sessions separated by 48 h. The procedure was repeated by rater A followed by rater B with random order. Three repetitions of each active movement (elbow flexion, pronation, and supination; and wrist flexion, extension, radial deviation and ulnar deviation) were executed starting from the neutral position until the ROM end-feel; that is, until ROM reached its maximum due to be stopped by the anatomy. The coefficient of determination (r 2) and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) were calculated to assess the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. The Standard Error of the Measurement and the Minimum Detectable Change and a Bland-Altman plots were also calculated.ResultsSimilar ROM values when measured with both instruments were obtained for the elbow (maximum difference of 3° for all the movements) and wrist (maximum difference of 1° for all the movements). These values were within the normal range when compared to literature studies. The concurrent validity analysis for all the movements yielded ICC values ≥0.78 for the elbow and ≥0.95 for the wrist. Concerning reliability, the ICC values denoted a high reliability of inertial sensors for all the different movements. In the case of the elbow, intra-rater and inter-rater reliability ICC values range from 0.83 to 0.96 and from 0.94 to 0.97, respectively. Intra-rater analysis of the wrist yielded ICC values between 0.81 and 0.93, while the ICC values for the inter-rater analysis range from 0.93 to 0.99.ConclusionsInertial sensors are a valid and reliable tool for measuring elbow and wrist active ROM. Particularly noteworthy is their high inter-rater reliability, often questioned in measurement tools. The lowest reliability is observed in elbow prono-supination, probably due to skin artifacts. Based on these results and their advantages, inertial sensors can be considered a valid assessment tool for wrist and elbow ROM.
| S-EPMC7427560 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The current study aimed to assess the repeatability and validity of cervical range of motion (CROM) measurements using an optical motion capture system (OMCS), compared with a CROM device. A total of 20 healthy volunteers were selected and enrolled in the current study after informed consent was received. The motion of the cervical spine in all directions was measured using the OMCS and CROM devices. Reproducibility of data was assessed using the intra-group correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimum detectable change (MDC). Validity was assessed using the coefficient of determination (R2) in combination with Pearson's correlation coefficient. Bland-Altman plot were presented for the two measurement methods. The range of motion (ROM) was measured by using the OMCS and the CROM device during the same session. Both procedures evidenced high ICCs [OMCS: ICC (1,2) =0.802-0.981; CROM device: ICC (1,2) =0.768-0.948], low SEM values (OMCS: 0.98°-1.38°; CROM device: 1.04°-2.45°) and low MDC values (OMCS: 2.72°-3.81°; CROM device: 2.89°-6.78°). A high R2 (0.568-0.882) and Pearson's correlation coefficient (0.753-0.939) were determined. The Bland-Altman plots demonstrated that most of the data were within the 95% consistency limit. In summary, the OMCS has good repeatability and validity when measuring CROM and is an effective way to evaluate cervical vertebral range of motion.
| S-EPMC6862302 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The human hand is important for the performance of activities of daily living which are directly related to quality of life. Various conditions, such as Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) can affect the function of the human hand and wrist. The ability to assess the impairment in the hand and the wrist by measuring the range of motion (ROM), is essential for the development of effective rehabilitation protocols. Currently the clinical standard is the goniometer. In this study we explore the feasibility and reliability of an optical sensor (Leap motion sensor) in measuring active hand/wrist ROM. We measured the hand/wrist ROM of 20 healthy adults with the goniometer and the Leap motion sensor, in order to check the agreement between the two methods and additionally, we performed a test-retest of the Leap motion sensor with 12 of them, to assess its reliability. The results suggest low agreement between the goniometer and the leap motion sensor, yet showing a large decrease in measurement time and high reliability when using the later. Despite the low agreement between the two methods, we believe that the Leap motion sensor shows potential to contribute to the development of hand rehabilitation protocols and be used with patients in a clinical setting.
| S-EPMC6210232 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe clinimetric properties of knee goniometry are essential to appreciate in light of its extensive use in the orthopaedic and rehabilitative communities. Intra-observer reliability is thought to be satisfactory, but the validity and inter-rater reliability of knee goniometry often demonstrate unacceptable levels of variation. This study tests the validity and reliability of measuring knee range of motion using goniometry and photographic records.MethodsDesignMethodology study assessing the validity and reliability of one method ('Marker Method') which uses a skin marker over the greater trochanter and another method ('Line of Femur Method') which requires estimation of the line of femur.SettingRadiology and orthopaedic departments of two teaching hospitals.Participants31 volunteers (13 arthritic and 18 healthy subjects). Knee range of motion was measured radiographically and photographically using a goniometer. Three assessors were assessed for reliability and validity.Main outcomesAgreement between methods and within raters was assessed using concordance correlation coefficient (CCCs). Agreement between raters was assessed using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs). 95% limits of agreement for the mean difference for all paired comparisons were computed.ResultsValidity (referenced to radiographs): Each method for all 3 raters yielded very high CCCs for flexion (0.975 to 0.988), and moderate to substantial CCCs for extension angles (0.478 to 0.678). The mean differences and 95% limits of agreement were narrower for flexion than they were for extension. Intra-rater reliability: For flexion and extension, very high CCCs were attained for all 3 raters for both methods with slightly greater CCCs seen for flexion (CCCs varied from 0.981 to 0.998). Inter-rater reliability: For both methods, very high ICCs (min to max: 0.891 to 0.995) were obtained for flexion and extension. Slightly higher coefficients were obtained for flexion compared to extension, and with the Marker compared to the Line of Femur Method. For intra- and inter-rater reliability, the mean differences (within 2 degrees) and 95% limits of agreement (within 5 degrees) were generally clinically acceptable for both methods.ConclusionPhotography potentially offers a superior method of measurement over standard goniometry as visualising the centre of the knee is simplified in a two-dimensional plane and the permanent record provides greater assessor transparency as well as opportunity to confer. The Marker and Line of Femur Methods have moderate to substantial validity, but the inter- and intra-rater repeatability for trained observers are excellent with both methods yielding small mean differences with narrow limits of agreement. The Line of Femur Method offers the added advantage that it does not rely on inter-clinician consistency in identifying the greater trochanter.
| S-EPMC3095577 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:New reliable devices for range of motion (ROM) measures in older adults are necessary to improve knowledge about the functional capability in this population. Dorsiflexion ROM limitation is associated with ankle injuries, foot pain, lower limb disorders, loss of balance, gait control disorders and fall risk in older adults. The aim of the present study was to assess the validity and reliability of the Leg Motion device for measuring ankle dorsiflexion ROM in older adults. METHODS:Adescriptive repeated-measures study was designed to test the reliability of Leg Motion in thirty-three healthy elderly patients older than 65 years. The subjects had to meet the following inclusion and exclusion criteria in their medical records: older than 65 years; no lower extremity injury for at least one year prior to evaluation (meniscopathy, or fractures) and any chronic injuries (e.g., osteoarthritis); no previous hip, knee or ankle surgery; no neuropathic alterations and no cognitive conditions (e.g., Alzheimer's disease or dementia). Participants were recruited through the person responsible for the physiotherapist area from a nursing center. The subjects were evaluated in two different sessions at the same time of day, and there was a break of two weeks between sessions. To test the validity of the Leg Motion system, the participants were measured in a weight-bearing lunge position using a classic goniometer with 1° increments, a smartphone with an inclinometer standard app (iPhone 5S®) with 1° increments and a measuring tape that could measure 0.1 cm. All testing was performed while the patients were barefoot. The researcher had ten years of experience as a physiotherapist using goniometer, tape measure and inclinometer devices. RESULTS:Mean values and standard deviations were as follows: Leg Motion (right 5.15 ± 3.08; left 5.19 ± 2.98), tape measure (right 5.12 ± 3.08; left 5.12 ± 2.80), goniometer (right 45.87° ± 4.98; left 44.50° ± 5.54) and inclinometer app (right 46.53° ± 4.79; left 45.27° ± 5.19). The paired t-test showed no significant differences between the limbs or between the test and re-test values. The test re-test reliability results for Leg Motion were as follows: the standard error of the measurement ranged from 0.29 to 0.43 cm, the minimal detectable difference ranged from 0.79 to 1.19 cm, and the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) values ranged from 0.97 to 0.98. CONCLUSIONS:The results of the present study indicated that the Leg Motion device is a valid, reliable, accessible and portable tool as an alternative to the classic weight-bearing lunge test for measuring ankle dorsiflexion ROM in older adults.
| S-EPMC5214953 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundConcurrent validity and intra-rater reliability using a customized Android phone application to measure cervical-spine range-of-motion (ROM) has not been previously validated against a gold-standard three-dimensional motion analysis (3DMA) system.FindingsTwenty-one healthy individuals (age:31?±?9.1?years, male:11) participated, with 16 re-examined for intra-rater reliability 1-7 days later. An Android phone was fixed on a helmet, which was then securely fastened on the participant's head. Cervical-spine ROM in flexion, extension, lateral flexion and rotation were performed in sitting with concurrent measurements obtained from both a 3DMA system and the phone.The phone demonstrated moderate to excellent (ICC?=?0.53-0.98, Spearman ??=?0.52-0.98) concurrent validity for ROM measurements in cervical flexion, extension, lateral-flexion and rotation. However, cervical rotation demonstrated both proportional and fixed bias. Excellent intra-rater reliability was demonstrated for cervical flexion, extension and lateral flexion (ICC?=?0.82-0.90), but poor for right- and left-rotation (ICC?=?0.05-0.33) using the phone. Possible reasons for the outcome are that flexion, extension and lateral-flexion measurements are detected by gravity-dependent accelerometers while rotation measurements are detected by the magnetometer which can be adversely affected by surrounding magnetic fields.ConclusionThe results of this study demonstrate that the tested Android phone application is valid and reliable to measure ROM of the cervical-spine in flexion, extension and lateral-flexion but not in rotation likely due to magnetic interference. The clinical implication of this study is that therapists should be mindful of the plane of measurement when using the Android phone to measure ROM of the cervical-spine.
| S-EPMC4021613 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNeck pain has a high annual incidence and decreases the cervical active range of motion (ROM). Clinicians use various methods to evaluate cervical range of motion (CROM) that some of them have also been proposed to give instant feedback. Accordingly, this study aimed to examine the validity and reliability of Veloflex (VF) to measure the CROM by comparison with the cervical range of motion (CROM) device, and to examine their test-retest reliability.MethodsThirty-eight healthy and 20 symptomatic participants were evaluated. Cervical flexion-extension, side bending, and rotations were tested in two sessions, first by the CROM and VF and in the second only with the VF. To evaluate the concurrent validity and agreement between CROM and VF, Pearson correlation coefficient (r) and Bland-Altmann plots were used. Reliability were evaluated using intra-class correlation (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC).ResultsCROM and VF showed excellent correlation for all movements (r > 0.960). Both devices provided small mean 'bias' (≤1.29%) in all movements regarding CROM measures. The intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of the VF was excellent (ICC > 0.98). SEMs ranging from 0.72% to 2.38% and the MDC ranging from 1.22° to 2.60° in all participants. The results support the validity and reliability of VF to measure CROM. For its use, with a basic training is enough to get reliable measurements.
| S-EPMC8029663 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Measuring joint range of motion is an important skill for many allied health professionals. While the Universal Goniometer is the most commonly utilised clinical tool for measuring joint range of motion, the evolution of smartphone technology and applications (apps) provides the clinician with more measurement options. However, the reliability and validity of these smartphones and apps is still somewhat uncertain. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature regarding the intra- and inter-rater reliability and validity of smartphones and apps to measure joint range of motion. Eligible studies were published in English peer-reviewed journals with full text available, involving the assessment of reliability and/or validity of a non-videographic smartphone app to measure joint range of motion in participants >18 years old. An electronic search using PubMed, Medline via Ovid, EMBASE, CINAHL, and SPORTSDiscus was performed. The risk of bias was assessed using a standardised appraisal tool. Twenty-three of the eligible 25 studies exceeded the minimum 60% score to be classified as a low risk of bias, although 3 of the 13 criteria were not achieved in >50% of the studies. Most of the studies demonstrated adequate intra-rater or inter-rater reliability and/or validity for >50% of the range of motion tests across all joints assessed. However, this level of evidence appeared weaker for absolute (e.g. mean difference ± limit of agreement, minimal detectable change) than relative (e.g. intraclass correlation, correlation) measures; and for spinal rotation than spinal extension, flexion and lateral flexion. Our results provide clinicians with sufficient evidence to support the use of smartphones and apps in place of goniometers to measure joint motion. Future research should address some methodological limitations of the literature, especially including the inclusion of absolute and not just relative reliability and validity statistics.
| S-EPMC6505893 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although the orientations of the hand and forearm vary for different wrist rehabilitation protocols, their effect on muscle forces has not been quantified. Physiologic simulators enable a biomechanical evaluation of the joint by recreating functional motions in cadaveric specimens. Control strategies used to actuate joints in physiologic simulators usually employ position or force feedback alone to achieve optimum load distribution across the muscles. After successful tests on a phantom limb, unique combinations of position and force feedback - hybrid control and cascade control - were used to simulate multiple cyclic wrist motions of flexion-extension, radioulnar deviation, dart thrower's motion, and circumduction using six muscles in ten cadaveric specimens. Low kinematic errors and coefficients of variation of muscle forces were observed for planar and complex wrist motions using both novel control strategies. The effect of gravity was most pronounced when the hand was in the horizontal orientation, resulting in higher extensor forces (p<0.017) and higher out-of-plane kinematic errors (p<0.007), as compared to the vertically upward or downward orientations. Muscle forces were also affected by the direction of rotation during circumduction. The peak force of flexor carpi radialis was higher in clockwise circumduction (p=0.017), while that of flexor carpi ulnaris was higher in anticlockwise circumduction (p=0.013). Thus, the physiologic wrist simulator accurately replicated cyclic planar and complex motions in cadaveric specimens. Moreover, the dependence of muscle forces on the hand orientation and the direction of circumduction could be vital in the specification of such parameters during wrist rehabilitation.
| S-EPMC5555257 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We analyzed the inter- and intra-examiner reliability of Werium inertial sensors and the cervical range of motion (CROM) instrument for the measurement of active CROM (AcROM) in patients with primary headache. Another objective is to analyze the validity of the inertial sensors (Werium). The literature has reported symptomatology features in patients diagnosed with primary headache similar to that of patients with cervicogenic headache. The International Classification of Headache (ICHD-III) established the presence of reduced AcROM as a diagnostic criterion for cervicogenic headache. Several instruments are used for this measurement, with limitations in their applicability in daily clinical practice. A prospective longitudinal repeated measures study was conducted to assess the intra- and inter-rater reliability and validity of Werium inertial sensors in 20 adults with chronic primary headache. For the inter-rater analysis, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values were above 0.75 for all movements, indicating a good level of reliability. For the intra-rater results, the ICC values obtained by the Werium inertial sensors for all cervical movements were good for rater A (ICC >0.80) and rater B (ICC >0.84). For the validity, the ICCs obtained by the Werium inertial sensors compared with the CROM instrument for all cervical movements were moderate for both raters (ICC > 0.70, respectively). Values obtained in the standard error of measurement, minimum detectable change at 90% and limits of agreement also indicated good agreement. Werium inertial sensors have shown good to excellent reliability results, both intra- and inter-examiner (ICC > 0.75). Likewise, when the sensors were compared with another validated instrument (CROM device) they obtained high reliability results (ICC > 0.70). These results plus its relatively low price and ease of use allow us to recommend it in daily clinical practice to measure AcROM in patients with chronic primary headache.
| S-EPMC8222639 | biostudies-literature