University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
J Sport Rehabil. 2011 Nov;20(4):393-405. doi: 10.1123/jsr.20.4.393.
Dynamic shoulder motion can be captured using video capture systems, but reliability has not yet been established.
To compare the reliability of 2 systems in measuring dynamic shoulder kinematics during forward-elevation movements and to determine differences in these kinematics between healthy and injured subjects.
Reliability and cohort.
Research laboratory.
11 healthy subjects and 10 post-superior labrum anteroposterior lesion patients (SLAP).
Contrasting markers were placed at the hip, elbow, and shoulder to represent shoulder elevation and were videotaped in 2 dimensions. Subjects performed 6 repetitions of active elevation (AE) and active assisted elevation of the shoulder, and 3 trials were analyzed using Datapac (comprehensive system) and Dartfish (basic system).
Amplitudes and velocities of the shoulder angle were calculated. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and levels of agreement (LOA) were used to determine intersystem and intertrial reliability.
For AE, the amplitude maximum (ICC = .98-.99, SEM = 2-3°, LOA = -9° to 5°) and average velocity (ICC = .94-.97, SEM = 1°/s, LOA = -4° to 1°/s) indicated excellent intersystem reliability between systems. Intratrial reliability for minimum velocity was moderate for Datapac (ICC = .64, SEM = 4°/s, LOA = 7°/s) and poor for Dartfish (ICC = .52, SEM = 20°/s, LOA = 37°/s). Cohort results demonstrated for AE a greater amplitude for healthy v SLAP (139° ± 11° v 113° ± 13°; P = .001) and interaction for an average velocity increase of 2°/s in healthy and decrease of 2°/s in SLAP patients over the 3 trials (P = .02).
Reliability ranges provide the means to assess the clinical meaningfulness of results. The cohort differences are supported when the values exceed the ranges of the SEM; hence the amplitude results are meaningful. For dynamic shoulder elevation measured using video, the assessment of velocity was found to produce moderate to good reliability. The results suggest that with these measures subtle changes in both measures may be possible with further investigations.
动态肩部运动可以使用视频采集系统进行捕捉,但可靠性尚未得到证实。
比较 2 种系统测量前向抬高运动中动态肩部运动学的可靠性,并确定健康和受伤受试者之间这些运动学的差异。
可靠性和队列研究。
研究实验室。
11 名健康受试者和 10 名肩盂上唇前后损伤(SLAP)患者。
在臀部、肘部和肩部放置对比标记以代表肩部抬高,并在 2 个维度进行录像。受试者进行 6 次主动抬高(AE)和主动辅助肩部抬高,使用 Datapac(综合系统)和 Dartfish(基本系统)分析 3 次试验。
计算肩部角度的幅度和速度。采用组内相关系数(ICC)、测量标准误差(SEM)和一致性水平(LOA)来确定系统间和试验内的可靠性。
对于 AE,最大幅度(ICC=.98-.99,SEM=2-3°,LOA=-9°至 5°)和平均速度(ICC=.94-.97,SEM=1°/s,LOA=-4°至 1°/s)表明系统间具有极好的系统间可靠性。Datapac 的最小速度的试验内可靠性为中度(ICC=.64,SEM=4°/s,LOA=7°/s),而 Dartfish 的可靠性为差(ICC=.52,SEM=20°/s,LOA=37°/s)。AE 队列结果显示,健康受试者的幅度大于 SLAP 患者(139°±11°比 113°±13°;P=.001),且健康受试者在 3 次试验中平均速度增加 2°/s,SLAP 患者的速度降低 2°/s(P=.02)。
可靠性范围为评估结果的临床意义提供了依据。当超出 SEM 的范围时,可支持队列差异;因此,幅度结果是有意义的。对于使用视频测量的动态肩部抬高,速度的评估结果发现具有中等至良好的可靠性。结果表明,对于这些测量,随着进一步研究,两种测量可能会发生微妙的变化。