T'Jonck L, Lysens R, Grasse G
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium.
Physiother Res Int. 1996;1(3):148-58. doi: 10.1002/pri.55.
Smooth motion of the scapula and humerus with respect to the thorax is essential for shoulder function and abnormalities may indicate clinical entities. Recent studies have made an attempt to devise simple, practical means of quantifying scapular position. The aim of this study was to examine the intra-tester and inter-tester reliability of two methods and to determine if significant differences existed between the dominant versus non-dominant extremity. Seventeen healthy volunteers (4 M; 13 F) were examined by two testers. The tape measurements consisted of the classic methods of Kibler and DiVeta in three sitting postures, expanded by the measurement of the linear distance from the medial border to the thoracic mid-line, and the scapular size measure. The SAS software package was used for data analysis. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) intra-tester reliability ranged between 0.96-0.8 for both methods without significant differences, whereas the ICC for inter-tester reliability ranged between 0.42-0.9 with higher values (moderate and good) for the Kibler technique. In the additional tests high values were also obtained for ICC intra-tester, except for the measurements of the linear distance of the medial border of the scapula to the thoracic mid-line and the distance of the inferior process of the acromion to the third vertebra, both in 90 degrees abduction and internal rotation. The ICC for inter-tester was only acceptable for the DiVeta measurement on 45 degrees abduction. Significant differences were noted between both testers on the following measures: Kibler in 45 degrees abduction, DiVeta in 45 degrees abduction and 90 degrees abduction and the scapular size measure. The comparison of dominant versus non-dominant extremity revealed larger but not significantly different means for the dominant extremity in the classic methods. Significant differences occurred for Tester 1 in the measurement of the distance of the medial border to the thoracic mid-line and Tester 2 in DiVita in 45 degrees abduction. The SEM values never exceeded 1 cm. We believe that the Kibler technique holds promise for further studies, has the advantage of measuring in three positions and with some familiarisation can be reliable. Further research is necessary in patients with pathological conditions.
肩胛骨和肱骨相对于胸廓的平滑运动对于肩部功能至关重要,异常情况可能提示临床病症。近期研究试图设计出简单、实用的方法来量化肩胛骨位置。本研究的目的是检验两种方法在测试者内部和测试者之间的可靠性,并确定优势侧与非优势侧肢体之间是否存在显著差异。17名健康志愿者(4名男性;13名女性)接受了两名测试者的检查。卷尺测量包括Kibler和DiVeta的经典方法,涉及三种坐姿,通过测量从内侧缘到胸廓中线的线性距离以及肩胛骨大小测量进行扩展。使用SAS软件包进行数据分析。两种方法的测试者内部可靠性的组内相关系数(ICC)在0.96 - 0.8之间,无显著差异,而测试者之间可靠性的ICC在0.42 - 0.9之间,Kibler技术的值更高(中等和良好)。在额外测试中,测试者内部ICC也获得了较高值,但在肩胛骨内侧缘到胸廓中线的线性距离测量以及肩峰下突到第三椎体的距离测量中除外,这两项测量均在90度外展和内旋时进行。测试者之间的ICC仅在45度外展时的DiVeta测量中可接受。在以下测量中,两名测试者之间存在显著差异:45度外展时的Kibler测量、45度和90度外展时的DiVeta测量以及肩胛骨大小测量。优势侧与非优势侧肢体的比较显示,在经典方法中,优势侧的平均值更大但无显著差异。在测量内侧缘到胸廓中线的距离时,测试者1存在显著差异,在45度外展时的DiVita测量中,测试者2存在显著差异。标准误(SEM)值从未超过1厘米。我们认为Kibler技术在进一步研究中有前景,具有在三个位置进行测量的优势,并且经过一些练习后可以可靠。对于患有病理状况的患者,有必要进行进一步研究。