Gradoz Marissa C, Bauer Lauren E, Grindstaff Terry L, Bagwell Jennifer J
J Sport Rehabil. 2018 Jul 1;27(4). doi: 10.1123/jsr.2017-0243.
CONTEXT: Hip rotation range of motion (ROM) is commonly assessed in individuals with lower extremity or spine pathology. It remains unknown which hip rotation ROM testing position is most reliable. OBJECTIVE: To compare interrater and intrarater reliabilities between hip internal rotation (IR) and external rotation (ER) ROM in supine and seated positions. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. SETTING: University research laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 19 participants (11 females and 8 males; age = 23.5 [1.2] y; height = 173.2 [8.6] cm; and mass = 69.2 [13.4] kg) without hip, knee, low back, or sacroiliac pain within the preceding 3 months or history of hip or low back surgery were recruited. INTERVENTIONS: Three testers obtained measures during 2 testing sessions. Passive supine and seated hip IR and ER ROM were performed with the hip and knee flexed to 90°. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were hip IR and ER ROM in supine and seated positions (in degrees). Interrater and intrarater reliabilities were calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Minimal detectable change was calculated. Differences between supine and seated hip IR and ER ROM values were assessed using paired t tests (significance level was .05). RESULTS: Supine hip IR and ER ROM interrater and intrarater reliabilities were excellent (ICC = .75-.91). Seated hip IR ROM interrater and intrarater reliabilities were good (ICC = .64-.71). Seated hip ER ROM interrater reliability was good (ICC = .65), and intrarater reliabilities were good to excellent (ICC = .65-.82). Minimal detectable change values for supine and seated hip IR and ER ROM ranged from 6.1° to 8.6°. There were significant differences between supine and seated positions for hip IR and ER ROM (41.6° vs 44.5°; P < .01 and 53.0° vs 44.2°; P < .01, respectively). CONCLUSION: Supine hip rotation had higher interrater and intrarater reliabilities. Hip IR and ER ROM values differed significantly between supine and seated positions and should not be used interchangeably.
背景：下肢或脊柱病变患者通常会评估髋关节旋转活动范围（ROM）。目前尚不清楚哪种髋关节旋转ROM测试体位最可靠。 目的：比较仰卧位和坐位时髋关节内旋（IR）和外旋（ER）ROM的评分者间信度和评分者内信度。 研究设计：对照实验室研究。 研究地点：大学研究实验室。 参与者：共招募了19名参与者（11名女性和8名男性；年龄=23.5[1.2]岁；身高=173.2[8.6]厘米；体重=69.2[13.4]千克），他们在过去3个月内无髋部、膝部、下背部或骶髂关节疼痛，也无髋部或下背部手术史。 干预措施：三名测试者在两次测试过程中进行测量。在髋关节和膝关节屈曲至90°时进行被动仰卧位和坐位髋关节IR和ER ROM测量。 主要观察指标：主要观察指标为仰卧位和坐位时髋关节IR和ER ROM（以度为单位）。使用组内相关系数（ICC）计算评分者间信度和评分者内信度。计算最小可检测变化。使用配对t检验评估仰卧位和坐位髋关节IR和ER ROM值之间的差异（显著性水平为0.05）。 结果：仰卧位髋关节IR和ER ROM的评分者间信度和评分者内信度极佳（ICC=0.75-0.91）。坐位髋关节IR ROM的评分者间信度和评分者内信度良好（ICC=0.64-0.71）。坐位髋关节ER ROM的评分者间信度良好（ICC=0.65），评分者内信度良好至极佳（ICC=0.65-0.82）。仰卧位和坐位髋关节IR和ER ROM的最小可检测变化值范围为6.1°至8.6°。髋关节IR和ER ROM在仰卧位和坐位之间存在显著差异（分别为41.6°对44.5°；P<0.01和53.0°对44.2°；P<0.01）。 结论：仰卧位髋关节旋转具有更高的评分者间信度和评分者内信度。髋关节IR和ER ROM值在仰卧位和坐位之间存在显著差异，不应互换使用。
J Sport Rehabil. 2018-7-1
J Sport Rehabil. 2016-12
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012-1-9
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2024-1-1
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2010-9
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2021-2
Front Psychol. 2021-6-14
Zotero 插件