2017
DOI: 10.1177/1758573217728711
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Normative values and affecting factors for the elbow range of motion

Abstract: Introduction: Abnormalities in the elbow range of motion (ROM) can be subtle; therefore, it is important that the examiner can compare findings with reliable reference values, matching the patients' characteristics. Primarily, we aimed to provide normative values for the elbow ROM in subpopulations based on age, sex, dominance and body mass index (BMI). The secondary objective was to determine intra-and inter-rater reliability. Methods: aROM (active range of motion) and pROM (passive range of motion) were meas… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
27
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
1
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…With respect to the reliability of the UG measurements, our study results are only partially in line with previous literature. Literature on interobserver and intraobserver reliability shows ICC values within a wide range, from 0.45-0.99, yet most ICCs were over 0.70 [1116, 19]. In our study, the interobserver reliability of UG was moderate to good, ranging from 0.40 to 0.71 and the intraobserver reliability was moderate to excellent, ranging from 0.47 to 0.84.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 44%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…With respect to the reliability of the UG measurements, our study results are only partially in line with previous literature. Literature on interobserver and intraobserver reliability shows ICC values within a wide range, from 0.45-0.99, yet most ICCs were over 0.70 [1116, 19]. In our study, the interobserver reliability of UG was moderate to good, ranging from 0.40 to 0.71 and the intraobserver reliability was moderate to excellent, ranging from 0.47 to 0.84.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 44%
“…Measurements were recorded with accuracy of 1 degree. A predefined protocol was used by both observers, based on recommendations in previous literature by using bony landmarks [14, 19, 21, 2329].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A recent study by Zwerus et al 21 found that elbow ROM is similarly affected by age, race, and BMI. Although this does not directly investigate the shoulder joint, it expands on the idea that upper extremity ROM is significantly affected by many different factors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The QAREL checklist showed a high quality (score > 60%) in six out of 12 studies; 7,21,[29][30][31]36 all other studies were of low quality. Most of the studies rated as low quality did not blind (or did not mention to blind) the raters to the findings of other raters 3,6,[32][33][34] or their own prior findings.…”
Section: Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Twelve articles were finally included for data extraction. 3,6,7,21,[29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36] Figure 1 shows the PRISMA flow chart.…”
Section: Study Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%