Stanton Tasha R, Kawchuk Gregory N
Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, Common Spinal Disorders Lab, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Man Ther. 2009 Apr;14(2):197-205. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2008.01.011. Epub 2008 Apr 2.
The reliability of manual methods to assess spinal stiffness is modest at best. In response, instrumentation has been developed which may be reliable, but is often difficult to use in clinical settings. The purpose of this study was to determine the intra-rater reliability of assisted indentation (AI), a smaller, less automated technique of measuring spinal stiffness in vivo. Twenty-three asymptomatic subjects were included in the study. The AI device was placed over the 4th lumbar spinous process in each prone, resting subject. Ten indentations were performed at approximately 2-min intervals while load and displacement data were collected simultaneously. From these data, two outcome variables were calculated: Global Stiffness (GS; slope of the force-displacement data) and Mean Maximal Stiffness (MMS; peak force/peak displacement). Intra-class correlation coefficient values for 10 consecutive measures of GS and MMS were 0.93 and 0.91, respectively. A repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) did not demonstrate significant differences between any indentation trials from the same subject. Measurement of spinal stiffness using AI demonstrated excellent intra-rater reliability. These data, in addition to specific features of AI (small, transportable, relatively low cost, ease of operation) suggest that AI may be of benefit within clinical environments.
评估脊柱刚度的手动方法的可靠性充其量只能说是一般。作为回应，已经开发出了一些仪器，这些仪器可能是可靠的，但在临床环境中往往难以使用。本研究的目的是确定辅助压痕法（AI）的评分者内信度，这是一种在体内测量脊柱刚度的较小且自动化程度较低的技术。23名无症状受试者被纳入研究。将AI设备放置在每个俯卧、休息的受试者的第4腰椎棘突上。每隔约2分钟进行10次压痕，同时收集载荷和位移数据。根据这些数据，计算出两个结果变量：整体刚度（GS；力-位移数据的斜率）和平均最大刚度（MMS；峰值力/峰值位移）。GS和MMS连续10次测量的组内相关系数值分别为0.93和0.91。重复测量方差分析（ANOVA）未显示同一受试者的任何压痕试验之间存在显著差异。使用AI测量脊柱刚度显示出优异的评分者内信度。这些数据，再加上AI的特定特征（体积小、可携带、成本相对较低、操作简便）表明，AI在临床环境中可能会有帮助。
