Suppr超能文献

使用卷尺、数字倾角计和惯性运动捕捉测量关节活动度测试的组内和组间可靠性。

Intra- and inter-rater reliability of joint range of motion tests using tape measure, digital inclinometer and inertial motion capturing.

机构信息

Institute for Occupational Medicine, Social Medicine and Environment Medicine, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

Institute of Sports Sciences, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2020 Dec 10;15(12):e0243646. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243646. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In clinical practice range of motion (RoM) is usually assessed with low-cost devices such as a tape measure (TM) or a digital inclinometer (DI). However, the intra- and inter-rater reliability of typical RoM tests differ, which impairs the evaluation of therapy progress. More objective and reliable kinematic data can be obtained with the inertial motion capture system (IMC) by Xsens. The aim of this study was to obtain the intra- and inter-rater reliability of the TM, DI and IMC methods in five RoM tests: modified Thomas test (DI), shoulder test modified after Janda (DI), retroflexion of the trunk modified after Janda (DI), lateral inclination (TM) and fingertip-to-floor test (TM).

METHODS

Two raters executed the RoM tests (TM or DI) in a randomized order on 22 healthy individuals while, simultaneously, the IMC data (Xsens MVN) was collected. After 15 warm-up repetitions, each rater recorded five measurements.

FINDINGS

Intra-rater reliabilities were (almost) perfect for tests in all three devices (ICCs 0.886-0.996). Inter-rater reliability was substantial to (almost) perfect in the DI (ICCs 0.71-0.87) and the IMC methods (ICCs 0.61-0.993) and (almost) perfect in the TM methods (ICCs 0.923-0.961). The measurement error (ME) for the tests measured in degree (°) was 0.9-3.3° for the DI methods and 0.5-1.2° for the IMC approaches. In the tests measured in centimeters the ME was 0.5-1.3cm for the TM methods and 0.6-2.7cm for the IMC methods. Pearson correlations between the results of the DI or the TM respectively with the IMC results were significant in all tests except for the shoulder test on the right body side (r = 0.41-0.81).

INTERPRETATION

Measurement repetitions of either one or multiple trained raters can be considered reliable in all three devices.

摘要

背景

在临床实践中,通常使用低成本设备(如卷尺或数字倾角仪)来评估关节活动度(ROM)。然而,典型的 ROM 测试的内部和内部评估者之间的可靠性存在差异,这会影响治疗进展的评估。Xsens 的惯性运动捕捉系统(IMC)可以更客观、更可靠地获得运动学数据。本研究的目的是获得改良托马斯测试(DI)、Janda 改良后的肩部测试(DI)、Janda 改良后的躯干后倾测试(DI)、侧向倾斜(TM)和指尖到地板测试(TM)这五个 ROM 测试中,卷尺、倾角仪和 IMC 方法的内部和内部评估者之间的可靠性。

方法

两名评估者以随机顺序对 22 名健康个体进行 ROM 测试(TM 或 DI),同时收集 IMC 数据(Xsens MVN)。在进行 15 次热身重复后,每个评估者记录五次测量值。

发现

在所有三种设备中,内部评估者可靠性几乎为完美(ICC 0.886-0.996)。在 DI(ICC 0.71-0.87)和 IMC 方法(ICC 0.61-0.993)中,内部评估者之间的可靠性为中等至高,在 TM 方法中几乎为完美(ICC 0.923-0.961)。以度(°)为单位测量的测试的测量误差(ME)为 DI 方法 0.9-3.3°,IMC 方法 0.5-1.2°。以厘米为单位测量的测试的 TM 方法的 ME 为 0.5-1.3cm,IMC 方法的 ME 为 0.6-2.7cm。除了右侧身体侧的肩部测试(r = 0.41-0.81)外,DI 或 TM 与 IMC 结果的相关性在所有测试中均显著。

解释

无论是一个还是多个经过培训的评估者进行的测量重复,在所有三种设备中都可以被认为是可靠的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a3a7/7728246/7960876b5d53/pone.0243646.g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验