Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of cervical active range of movement in young asymptomatic adults using inertial sensors

Anoro-Hervera, Alejandro; Lafuente-Pérez, Adrián; Navarro-Fernández, Gonzalo; Muñoz-García, Daniel; Lerma-Lara, Sergio; Beltrán-Alacreu, Héctor

doi:10.1080/17434440.2019.1696675

Cited by 15 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to the current evidence, four studies have analyzed the reliability of inertial sensors to assess CROM (Schiefer et al, 2015[ 27 ]; Raya et al, 2018[ 25 ]; Anoro-Hervera et al, 2019[ 3 ]; Gobbo et al, 2020[ 14 ]). All of them assessed inter-rater reliability (Raya et al, 2018[ 25 ]; Anoro-Hervera et al, 2019[ 3 ]; Gobbo et al, 2020[ 14 ]), two of them intra-rater reliability, (Schiefer et al, 2015[ 27 ]; Anoro-Hervera et al, 2019[ 3 ]), and two the validity of the inertial sensors (Schiefer et al, 2015[ 27 ]; Raya et al, 2018[ 25 ]). In this context, the inter-rater reliability results presented by the Werium inertial sensor in the present study (ICC > 0.75) are very similar to those presented by the inertial sensors of the four previous studies (Schiefer et al, 2015[ 27 ]; Raya et al, 2018[ 25 ]; Anoro-Hervera et al, 2019[ 3 ]; Gobbo et al, 2020[ 14 ]).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All of them assessed inter-rater reliability (Raya et al, 2018[ 25 ]; Anoro-Hervera et al, 2019[ 3 ]; Gobbo et al, 2020[ 14 ]), two of them intra-rater reliability, (Schiefer et al, 2015[ 27 ]; Anoro-Hervera et al, 2019[ 3 ]), and two the validity of the inertial sensors (Schiefer et al, 2015[ 27 ]; Raya et al, 2018[ 25 ]). In this context, the inter-rater reliability results presented by the Werium inertial sensor in the present study (ICC > 0.75) are very similar to those presented by the inertial sensors of the four previous studies (Schiefer et al, 2015[ 27 ]; Raya et al, 2018[ 25 ]; Anoro-Hervera et al, 2019[ 3 ]; Gobbo et al, 2020[ 14 ]). However, only one of these analyzed the MDC 90 and SEM, contributing more data to clinical practice (Anoro-Hervera et al, 2019[ 3 ]).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This Pro Motion Capture software executed the signal and calculated and displayed in real time the range of motion (ROM) of each of the participants' movements. This instrument has shown high intra-rater (ICC < 0.90) and inter-rater (ICC < 0.75) reliability (Raya et al, 2018[ 25 ]; Anoro-Hervera et al, 2019[ 3 ])…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, according to the literature, commonly used instruments for measuring AcROM include visual estimation, tape measurements, various types of goniometers and universal inclinometers, the CROM inclinometer and motion analysis using a 3D measurement system (Anoro-Hervera et al, 2019[ 3 ]). Along these lines, the gold standard for AcROM measurement is the 3D motion analysis laboratory, which allows measurement in terms of amplitude, velocity and quality, expressing these numerically and graphically.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These devices have been studied in various regions. Specifically, Werium Solutions inertial sensors have shown high intra- and inter-examination reliability in assessing elbow (ICC 0.83-0.96 and 0.94-0.97, respectively) and neck (ICC >0.70) movements (Raya et al, 2018[ 25 ]; Anoro-Hervera et al, 2019[ 3 ]; Costa et al, 2020[ 9 ]). Despite these results, however, no previous research has been performed in a symptomatic population such as patients with headache, nor have comparisons been made with another validated instrument commonly used in clinical practice, such as the CROM device.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Inter, intra-examiner reliability and validity of inertial sensors to measure the active cervical range of motion in patients with primary headache

Elizagaray-García

Gil-Martínez

Navarro-Fernández

et al. 2021

EXCLI Journal; 20:Doc879; ISSN 1611-2156

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Inter, intra-examiner reliability and validity of inertial sensors to measure the active cervical range of motion in patients with primary headache

Elizagaray-García

Gil-Martínez

Navarro-Fernández

et al. 2021

EXCLI Journal; 20:Doc879; ISSN 1611-2156

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reliability and Validity of A Novel Device for Evaluating the Cervical Proprioception

Zhang

Chen

et al. 2023

Pain Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction In clinical practice, cervical proprioception is usually evaluated by calculating the cervical joint position error (JPE) with laser pointer devices (LPD) or cervical range-of-motion (CROM) instruments. As technology continues to improve, more and more advanced tools are used to evaluate cervical proprioception. The purpose of this study was to analyze the reliability and validity of the WitMotion sensor (WS) device in evaluating cervical proprioception, and to explore a cheaper, more convenient, and more practical testing tool. Methods Twenty-eight healthy participants (16 women, 12 men; age 25–66 years) were recruited and evaluated for cervical joint position error with a WS and LPD by two independent observers. All participants repositioned their head to the target position and the deviation of repositioning was calculated using these two instruments. The intra- and inter-rater reliability of the instrument were determined by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and the validity was analyzed by calculating the ICC and the Spearman’s correlation. Results The intra-rater reliability of the WS (ICCs = 0.682–0.774) was higher than that of the LPD (ICCs = 0.512–0.719) for measuring JPE of cervical flexion, right lateral flexion, and left rotation. However, the LPD (ICCs = 0.767–0.796) outperformed the WS (ICCs = 0.507–0.661) in cervical extension, left lateral flexion, and right rotation. For the inter-rater reliability, the ICC values obtained by the WS and the LPD were above 0.70 for all cervical movements except cervical extension and left lateral flexion (ICCs = 0.580–0.679). For the validity, the ICC values were moderate to good (ICCs > 0.614) for measuring JPE in all movements with the WS and the LPD. Conclusions Based on the high ICC values of reliability and validity, the novel device can be an alternative tool to evaluate cervical proprioception in clinical practice. Trial Registration This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2100047228).

show abstract

The reliability and validity of a novel wearable inertial sensor to measure the cervical proprioception

Wang,

Zhao

et al. 2024

Medical Engineering & Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of cervical active range of movement in young asymptomatic adults using inertial sensors

Cited by 15 publications

References 50 publications

Inter, intra-examiner reliability and validity of inertial sensors to measure the active cervical range of motion in patients with primary headache

Inter, intra-examiner reliability and validity of inertial sensors to measure the active cervical range of motion in patients with primary headache

Reliability and Validity of A Novel Device for Evaluating the Cervical Proprioception

The reliability and validity of a novel wearable inertial sensor to measure the cervical proprioception

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About