Comparison of visual and ultrasound based techniques to measure head repositioning in healthy and neck-pain subjects

Using the cervical range of motion (CROM) device to assess head repositioning accuracy in individuals with cervical radiculopathy in comparison to neck- healthy individuals

“…The observed statistically significant difference in HRA is consistent with findings from previous studies that included individuals with other types of neck disorders (Revel et al, 1991;Loudon et al, 1997;Heikkila and Wenngren, 1998;Kristjansson et al, 2003;Treleaven et al, 2003;Roren et al, 2009). The current values for HRA also are similar to those reported in a study comparing individuals with whiplash-associated disorders to neck-healthy individuals in which mean HRA was respectively 3.6° and 2° after rotation to the right and 4.1° and 2.5° after rotation to the left (Treleaven et al, 2003).…”

“…Comparison of our results for HRA with those of other studies should nevertheless be done with caution considering the use of different assessment methods and statistical analysis (Loudon et al, 1997;Roren et al, 2009), and that no other study was identified that included individuals with CDD.…”

“…Our results suggest that the CROM device can be used to quantify impairment in HRA with some acceptable level of reliability in individuals with CDD (Weir, 2005), and in a manner comparable to a laser in individuals with neck pain (ICC = 0.68) (Roren et al, 2009). However, the SEM data indicate a level of variability with the CROM device that may overlook small impairments in HRA and question the use of the CROM device to evaluate true changes in HRA over time (Weir, 2005).…”

“…Larger than typical errors in head repositioning accuracy (HRA) have been reported in individuals with neck disorders (Revel et al, 1991;Loudon et al, 1997;Kristjansson et al, 2003;Treleaven et al, 2003); although the results are controversial (Rix and Bagust, 2001;Hill et al, 2009); without a consensus on the best method (Strimpakos, 2011). The original test used a laser to assess HRA (Revel et al, 1991), a method that has since been widely used (Heikkila and Wenngren, 1998;Vuillerme et al, 2008;Pinsault and Vuillerme, 2010) and that exhibits good reliability (Pinsault et al, 2008a) and validity (Pinsault et al, 2008b;Roren et al, 2009). As an alternative method for assessment of HRA, the Cervical Range of Motion (CROM) device has been used in several studies with reported good reliability (Loudon et al, 1997;Dumas et al, 2001;Uremovic et al, 2007).…”

“…Knowledge about assessment of HRA with the CROM device in neck-healthy individuals is also limited (Loudon et al, 1997), and the device has not been compared to a laser which might be considered the gold standard for clinical practice (Roren et al, 2009). …”