Concurrent validity and reliability of the Simple Goniometer iPhone app compared with the Universal Goniometer

Jones, Anne; Sealey, Rebecca; Crowe, Michael J.; Gordon, Susan

doi:10.3109/09593985.2014.900835

Cited by 81 publications

(91 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…al were comparing iOS apps "GetMyROM" and "DrGoniometer" and found both reliable and comparable to the mechanical goniometer [13]. In another study testing the iOS accelerometer "Simple Goniometer", Jones et al judged the app reliable [14]. The four clinical studies support the results of this study with regard to the apps "DrGoniometer", GetMyROM" and "Simple Goniometer".…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 66%

Goniometer-apps in hand surgery and their applicability in daily clinical practice

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Smartphones have become an integral part of our daily lives, and numerous applications (apps) make use of the goniometer, which is comparable to a medical protractor. The aim of this study was to evaluate the availability, reliability and validity of medical apps using the goniometer function in smartphones. Methods: Sixteen goniometer-apps downloaded from Apple's (twelve apps) and Google's (four apps) app stores matched initial inclusion criteria (inclusion criteria: *gonio* or *rom*, specifically designed to measure angles) were assessed and compared to a universal mechanical goniometer by measuring an irregular, four-sided pyramid with distinct angles. Results: Twelve iOS (Apple's operating system) and four Android (Google's operating system) apps were included. Ten of twelve iOS apps were showing an average deviation from the real angles of a maximum 1.8°; the values for Android apps did not exceed 1.3°. Conclusions: Fourteen out of sixteen apps were reliable and valid for measuring angles. Based on correct handling and adequate user-applicability of the on-board goniometer these apps can make a smartphone applicable for data acquisition in medicine. So far, smartphone apps for measuring angles have not been readily applied in clinical practice in hand surgery.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 66%

Goniometer-apps in hand surgery and their applicability in daily clinical practice

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, the thoracic spine has multiple adjacent joints and its motion requires contraction of multi-joint musculature. It has been proposed that such characteristics are likely to reduce the reliability and hence validity for measurements of these joints which provides an explanation for why our validity data, while demonstrating a strong positive correlation (r = 0.835, P<0.001), was slightly lower in comparison to the majority of studies reviewed (Jones, 2014;Milanese, 2014;Mitchell, 2014;Norkin, 2016;Shin, 2012).…”

Section: Concurrent Valititycontrasting

confidence: 50%

“…Several of these articles used clinical tools as the gold standard reference (goniometer, inclinometer, scoliometer etc.) (Jenny et al 2016;Jones et al 2014;Tousignant-Laflamme et al 2013), however no study was identified that utilized a mobile phone application to determine thoracic spine rotation ROM (reliability or Validity).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer Review #1 of "Reliability and concurrent validity of the iPhone® Compass application to measure thoracic rotation range of motion (ROM) in healthy participants (v0.1)"

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Several water based sports (swimming, surfing and stand up paddle boarding) require adequate thoracic mobility (specifically rotation) in order to perform the appropriate activity requirements. The measurement of thoracic spine rotation is problematic for clinicians due to a lack of convenient and reliable measurement techniques. More recently, smartphones have been used to quantify movement in various joints in the body, however there appears to be a paucity of research using smartphones to assess thoracic spine movement. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine the reliability (intra and inter rater) and validity of the iPhone ® app (Compass) when assessing thoracic spine rotation ROM in healthy individuals. Methods A total of thirty participants were recruited for this study. Thoracic spine rotation ROM was measured using both the current clinical gold standard, a universal goniometer (UG) and the Smart Phone Compass app. Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability was determined with a Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI). Validation of the Compass app in comparison to the UG was measured using Pearson's correlation coefficient and levels of agreement were identified with Bland-Altman plots and 95% limits of agreement. Results:Both the UG and Compass app measurements both had excellent reproducibility for intra-rater (ICC 0.94-0.98) and inter-rater reliability (ICC 0.72-0.89). However, the Compass app measurements had higher intra-rater reliability (ICC = 0.96-0.98; 95% CI 0.93-0.99; vs. ICC = 0.94-0.98; 95% CI 0.88-0.99) and inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.87-0.89; 95% CI 0.74-0.95 vs. ICC = 0.72-0.82; 95% CI 0.21-0.94). A strong and significant correlation was found between the UG and the Compass app, demonstrating good concurrent validity (r =0.835, p<0.001). Levels of agreement between the two devices were 24.8° (LoA -9.5°, +15.3°). The UG was found to consistently measure higher values PeerJ reviewing PDF | (Manuscript to be reviewed than the compass app (mean difference 2.8°, P<0.001). Conclusion: This study reveals that the iPhone ® app (Compass) is a reliable tool for measuring thoracic spine rotation which produces greater reproducibility of measurements both within and between raters than a UG. As a significant positive correlation exists between the Compass app and UG, this supports the use of either device in clinical practice as a reliable and valid tool to measure thoracic rotation. Considering the levels of agreement are clinically unacceptable the devices should not be used interchangeably for initial and follow up measurements.PeerJ reviewing PDF | (ABSTRACT Background: Several water based sports (swimming, surfing and stand up paddle boarding) require adequate thoracic mobility (specifically rotation) in order to perform the appropriate activity requirements. The measurement of thoracic spine rotation is problematic for clinicians due to a lack of convenient and reliable measurement techniques. More recently, smartphones have ...

show abstract

“…Indeed, the measurement of the mobile application was slightly more accurate than that obtained from UG, with no statistically significant differences between the measurements made by the students and those of the experienced physicians (ICC > 0,96 in both cases). In a similar study, Jones [20] carry out a comparison between UG and an iPhone app for measuring the passive flexion of the knee in a cohort of 36 subjects, no finding statistically On the basis of a cohort of five subjects, Ockendon and Gilbert [21] compare the validity of a purpose-built mobile application to that of a traditional goniometer for measuring knee range of motion. This results show that the values obtained from both measurement instruments are closely correlated, albeit with slight differences in favor of the mobile app (inter-observer correlation: was 0,994 vs. 0,952 and intraobserver correlation: was 0,982 vs. 0,927); the mean difference between the two is only -0,4º.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and Concurrent Validity of the Goniometer-Pro App vs a Universal Goniometer in determining Passive Flexion of Knee

Ortiz¹,

Val²,

Delgado³

2017

IJCA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Smartphones have become a staple in our society. They are essential not only for our day-to-day lives but also as a healthcare tool in the face of the emergence of a myriad of health-based applications. Analyze the reliability and concurrent validity of an iPhone app as compared with traditional goniometry.Methods: 21 subjects of our work centre, in 2016 had 4 measurements of their degree of knee flexion for a randomly chosen knee position: 2 by universal goniometry (UG) and 2 by the Goniometer-Pro (G-Pro) application. A different evaluator made each measurement. The radiographs were used as a gold standard to measure the actual knee flexion angle.Results: The difference between mean intra-group values was 3,148º (±2,669º) and 2,476º (±2,638º) for G-Pro. The difference between the mean intra-group values was 5.45º. Inter-observer consistency for UG was 0,990 and 0,993 for GPro; As regards validity, the values obtained were 0,976 for UG and 0,992 for G-Pro.Conclusions: The Goniometer-Pro app seems to be a reliable and accurate tool for determining the values of knee flexion. The values obtained are slightly more accurate than those of traditional goniometry.Implication: This study intend to promote the use of apps of systemic form in the health system, as a component integrated into the management of the health. This work not only compares the reliability of two methods of measurement, compare the reliability or validity with a gold standard, as it is the radiological measurement.

show abstract

Concurrent validity and reliability of the Simple Goniometer iPhone app compared with the Universal Goniometer

Cited by 81 publications

References 9 publications

Goniometer-apps in hand surgery and their applicability in daily clinical practice

Goniometer-apps in hand surgery and their applicability in daily clinical practice

Peer Review #1 of "Reliability and concurrent validity of the iPhone® Compass application to measure thoracic rotation range of motion (ROM) in healthy participants (v0.1)"

Reliability and Concurrent Validity of the Goniometer-Pro App vs a Universal Goniometer in determining Passive Flexion of Knee

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About