Department of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia.
Department of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2022 Jun;45(5):346-357. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2022.08.005. Epub 2022 Oct 19.
The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the reliability and, where possible, the validity of cervicocephalic proprioceptive (CCP) tests in healthy adults and clinical populations.
A systematic search, utilizing 7 databases from the earliest possible date to April 14, 2021, identified studies that measured reliability of CCP tests. Studies were screened for eligibility, and included studies were appraised using Quality Appraisal Tool for Studies of Diagnostic Reliability (QAREL) and Quality Assessment and Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 Tool (QUADAS-2) tools. Validity outcomes were assessed for included studies.
Of 34 included studies, 29 investigated reliability for sense of position tests, 10 involved sense of movement tests, and 1 used a sense of force test. The head to neutral test was reliable and valid when 6 or more repetitions were performed within the test, discriminating between those with and without neck pain. Head tracking tests were reliable with 6 repetitions, and 1 study found discriminative validity in a whiplash population. Studies that found discriminative validity in sense of position reported mean joint position error generally >4.5° in the neck pain group and <4.5° in the asymptomatic group. No sense of force test was applied to a clinical population. Convergent validity analysis showed that these proprioceptive tests have low correlations with each other.
The reliability and validity of CCP tests for sense of position and movement are dependent upon equipment and repetitions. Six repetitions are generally required for good reliability, and joint position error >4.5° is likely to indicate impairment in sense of position.
本系统评价旨在确定颈椎本体感觉(CCP)测试在健康成年人和临床人群中的可靠性,且在可能的情况下,还确定其有效性。
从最早的日期到 2021 年 4 月 14 日,通过 7 个数据库进行系统检索,以确定测量 CCP 测试可靠性的研究。对研究进行筛选,以确定其是否符合入选标准,并使用质量评估工具用于研究诊断可靠性(QAREL)和诊断准确性研究质量评估工具-2(QUADAS-2)工具对纳入研究进行评估。对纳入研究进行了有效性评估。
在 34 项纳入研究中,有 29 项研究调查了位置感测试的可靠性,10 项研究涉及运动感测试,1 项研究使用了力感测试。当在测试中进行 6 次或更多次重复时,头部中立位测试是可靠且有效的,可区分有无颈痛的个体。头部跟踪测试在进行 6 次重复时具有可靠性,且有 1 项研究在挥鞭伤人群中发现了区分效度。在位置感方面发现区分效度的研究报告,颈痛组的平均关节位置误差通常大于 4.5°,而无症状组的平均关节位置误差小于 4.5°。没有力感测试应用于临床人群。聚合效度分析表明,这些本体感觉测试彼此之间相关性较低。
CCP 测试在位置感和运动感方面的可靠性和有效性取决于设备和重复次数。通常需要 6 次重复以获得良好的可靠性,且关节位置误差>4.5°可能表明位置感受损。