Reliability of a laser beam device for the assessment of head repositioning accuracy in patients with chronic neck pain

Reliability of the Moover® 3D Inertial Motion Sensor in Greek Patients With Chronic Neck Pain in a Primary Care Urban Setting

Introduction Neck pain has a high lifetime prevalence and represents a significant health issue. Reduced active cervical range of motion (ACROM) has been found in neck pain patients. Inertial sensor technology can provide objective measurements to assess the impaired ACROM. Purpose Primarily, this study investigated the inter- and intra-rater reliability of the Moover® three-dimensional (3D) inertial motion sensor (Sensor Medica, Rome, Italy) in Greek patients with non-specific chronic neck pain. Secondly, the intra-rater reliability of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) was also assessed. Methods Fifty patients (18 males and 32 females) suffering from non-specific chronic neck pain participated in this study. Two physiotherapists measured separately each participant's ACROM in three planes, within a 48-hour period. The participants' position and the sequence and direction of the three cervical movements (cervical rotation, lateral flexion, and flexion-extension) were standardized. Results The inter-rater reliability intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values were good to excellent ranging from 0.77 to 0.95 for the first measurement and 0.85 to 0.95 for the second (p < 0.001). The intra-rater reliability ICC values were moderate to excellent ranging from 0.74 to 0.92 for the first rater and good to excellent ranging from 0.83 to 0.94 for the secondrater (p < 0.001). Intra-rater reliability of the overall NDI was indicated as good, and ICC was 0.80 (95%CI: 0.65-0.89; p < 0.001). ICC values for all sections were significant and ranged from 0.40 to 0.88. Conclusion This study showed the reliability of the Moover 3D inertial sensor for ACROM measurement in Greek patients with chronic neck pain. The NDI scale also showed good intra-rater reliability in the same sample. Both intra- and inter-rater reliability of the Moover 3D were proven to be acceptable over a 48-hour period. The specific sensor might have a potential application in a clinical setting.

Reliability and Validity of the Double Inclinometer Method for Assessing Thoracolumbar Joint Position Sense and Range of Movement in Patients with a Recent History of Low Back Pain

The study was aimed at examining the reliability of the Double Inclinometer (DI) method for the assessment of thoracolumbar Range of Movement (ROM) and Joint Position Sense (JPS) in patients with a recent history of Low Back Pain (LBP). Twenty patients with a history of LBP in the last three months participated. The thoracolumbar ROM and JPS were examined from a standing position by using both the DI and the tape measure method. The DI method was found to have moderate to good intra-rater (ICC = 0.68-0.79, SEM = 2.20-2.77°, SDD = 6.09-7.67°), moderate inter-rater (ICC = 0.59-0.62, SEM = 2.96-3.35°, SDD = 8.19-9.27°) and poor test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.13-0.17, SEM = 3.98-4.32°, SDD = 11.02-11.96°) for the assessment of thoracolumbar JPS. For the assessment of thoracolumbar ROM, the DI method was found to have good to excellent intra-rater (ICC = 0.88-0.94, SEM = 4.25-6.20°, SDD = 11.77-17.17°), excellent inter-rater (ICC = 0.90-0.91, SEM = 7.26-7.74°, SDD = 20.11-21.43°) and excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.91-0.93, SEM = 6.03-6.87°, SDD = 16.70-19.02°). The concurrent validity of the DI method with the tape measure method was found to be very weak for the assessment of thoracolumbar JPS (r = 0.02, p = 0.93) and strong for the assessment of thoracolumbar ROM (r = 0.66, p = 0.001). The DI method seems to be a very reliable method for the assessment of thoracolumbar ROM in individuals with a recent history of LBP.

Neck proprioception assessment with a laser beam device: reliability in participants without neck pain and differences between participants with and without neck pain

Background

Proprioception deficits have previously been reported in patients with non-specific chronic neck pain (NSCNP), with a comprehensive and valid battery of tests still required. This study aimed to investigate the test-retest and inter-rater reliability of cervical proprioception in participants without NSCNP and to examine differences in proprioception between participants with and without NSCNP. Twenty participants without NSCNP and 20 age- and sex-matched participants with NSCNP were recruited. Proprioception tests were sequentially performed in random order, in four head-to-neutral movement directions (starting positions at mid-flexion, mid-extension and mid-right/mid-left rotation head-neck positions and end position at neutral head-neck posture) and two head-to-target movement directions (starting position from neutral head-neck posture and end positions at right and left 45° rotation), with a laser beam device secured onto their forehead. Participants performed all tests in sitting at a 1-m distance from a whiteboard. The average deviations of the laser beam mark from set targets marked on the whiteboard represented proprioception deficits. The two-way random, absolute agreement model of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), the standard error of the measurement (SEM) and the smallest detectable difference (SDD) were used as measures of reliability. Between-group differences were examined with the independent samples t test.

Results

The reliability of the laser beam device in participants without neck pain varied from poor to good. The following tests demonstrated good reliability: test-retest ‘Head-to-neutral from flexion’ (ICC: 0.77–0.78; SDD: 5.73–6.84 cm), inter-rater ‘Head-to-neutral from flexion’ (ICC: 0.80–0.82; SDD: 6.20–6.45 cm) and inter-rater ‘Head-to-neutral from right/left rotation’ (ICC: 0.80–0.84; SDD: 5.92–6.81 cm). Differences between participants with and without NSCNP were found only in head-to-neutral from flexion (4.10–4.70 cm); however, those were within the limits of the SDD values of the HtN from flexion test.

Conclusions

The laser beam device can be reliably used in clinical practice only in the aforementioned head-neck movement directions, based on the findings of the present study. The between-group differences noted involved only the head mid-flexion to neutral test, possibly denoting proprioception deficits only in this movement direction, for reasons that require further evaluation.