Suppr超能文献

慢性特发性颈痛患者四种本体感觉测试的可靠性、测量误差和结构效度。

Reliability, measurement error and construct validity of four proprioceptive tests in patients with chronic idiopathic neck pain.

机构信息

School of Health Sciences, University of Aveiro, Campus Universitário de Santiago, 3810-193, Aveiro, Portugal.

School of Health Sciences, University of Aveiro, Campus Universitário de Santiago, 3810-193, Aveiro, Portugal; Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS.UA), University of Aveiro, Campus Universitário de Santiago, 3810-193, Aveiro, Portugal.

出版信息

Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2019 Oct;43:103-109. doi: 10.1016/j.msksp.2019.07.010. Epub 2019 Jul 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There are different neck proprioceptive tests that are believed to be targeting different sources of proprioceptive information.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the reliability, measurement error, discriminative validity and convergent validity of four proprioceptive tests (head repositioning to neutral - HRNT, torsion test - TT, head repositioning to 30° rotation - HR30T and figure of eight relocation test - F8T) in individuals with chronic idiopathic neck pain and asymptomatic individuals. A secondary aim was to assess the divergent validity of these tests by correlating them against measures of disability, pain catastrophizing and fear of movement.

DESIGN

  • Reliability and validity study.

METHODS

  • 66 participants (33 with chronic neck pain and 33 asymptomatic) were assessed using four proprioceptive tests, pain catastrophizing scale, neck disability index, tampa scale of kinesiophobia and visual analogue scale.

RESULTS

Proprioceptive tests showed moderate to good reliability (ICC: 0.55 to 0.85), but high measurement error. All tests but the HR30T were significantly different between participants with and without neck pain (p < 0.05). Only the HRNT showed an area under the curve above 0.5 (AUC95% CI = 0.51; 0.78, p ≤ 0.042). Between test correlations ranged between 0.35 and 0.61 and correlations between proprioceptive tests and catastrophizing, fear of movement and disability were, in general, lower than 0.3.

CONCLUSION

The four proprioceptive tests showed reliability and measurement errors good enough for group comparisons but of limited utility for individual comparisons. They seem to measure related but dissimilar constructs and the HRNT seemed better at discriminating individuals with and without NP and easier to perform in clinical practice.

摘要

背景

有不同的颈部本体感觉测试,被认为针对不同的本体感觉信息来源。

目的

评估四种本体感觉测试(头部复位至中立位 - HRNT、扭转测试 - TT、头部复位至 30°旋转位 - HR30T 和 8 字形重定位测试 - F8T)在慢性特发性颈痛患者和无症状个体中的可靠性、测量误差、判别有效性和收敛有效性。次要目的是通过将这些测试与残疾、疼痛灾难化和运动恐惧的测量值相关联来评估这些测试的发散有效性。

设计

  • 可靠性和有效性研究。

方法

  • 66 名参与者(33 名慢性颈痛患者和 33 名无症状者)使用四种本体感觉测试、疼痛灾难化量表、颈部残疾指数、坦帕运动恐惧量表和视觉模拟量表进行评估。

结果

本体感觉测试显示出中等至良好的可靠性(ICC:0.55 至 0.85),但测量误差较高。除 HR30T 外,所有测试在有颈痛和无颈痛的参与者之间均有显著差异(p<0.05)。只有 HRNT 的曲线下面积(AUC95%CI=0.51;0.78,p≤0.042)大于 0.5。测试之间的相关性在 0.35 到 0.61 之间,本体感觉测试与灾难化、运动恐惧和残疾之间的相关性通常低于 0.3。

结论

四项本体感觉测试在组间比较中显示出足够的可靠性和测量误差,但在个体比较中的实用性有限。它们似乎测量了相关但不同的结构,HRNT 似乎在区分有和无 NP 的个体方面表现更好,并且在临床实践中更容易执行。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验