Lumbar range of motion1/20/2024 software and user guide recommends testing lumbar motion using the T12 spinous process and the sacral midpoint as landmarks for inclinometer placement. Secondly, we wish to determine the concurrent validity of the CDI in relation to the MMS (Figs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the intra-trial, intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of lumbar flexion and extension measurements using the Tracker M.E. However, if two different tests of spinal motion are highly correlated, this would support the validity of both tests as measuring spinal motion. Radiographic examinations would be considered to be the ‘gold standard’ for measuring spinal motion, but they are expensive and require exposure to harmful radiation. Validity is the extent to which a measurement conveys the true status of the trait measured. However, they did not use a computerized double. ![]() There has been a previous reliability study comparing a manual dual inclinometer and the modified-modified Schober test and found that the MMS test was the more reliable of the two methods. The concurrent validity and reliability of this system is yet to be determined in LBP patients. The Tracker’s Dual inclinometer is considered more valid than a single inclinometer, as it can extract extraneous motion, and is preferred when documenting spinal ROM. CDI software system) 1 developed by the J tech industries is in line with AMA’s “Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment”. The computerized dual inclinometry (CDI) system (Tracker M.E. Innovations in instrument technology and modification of techniques may provide improved evaluation of lumbar ROM but is not known whether this is true until demonstrated through scientific studies. One theoretical disadvantage of the MMS is that it measures linear motion whereas spinal motion occurs in an angular path. 5, 10, 15 and 20 cm), and suggested that this length was realistic approximation of the average length of the lumbar spine. Van Adrichen and Van der Krost determined that 15cm was optimal after evaluating 5 cm intervals above the PSIS (i.e. The elimination of the lower mark may reduce the measurement error. ![]() The points of measurement are the spinal intersection of the PSIS and a mark made 15 cm above. ![]() The modified-modified Schober (MMS) described by Van Adrichem and VanDer Korst was chosen for this study for several reasons. Many reliability and validity problems have been documented with the modified Schober technique. The modified Schober technique uses marks 10 cm above and 5 cm below the posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) which on average only encompasses 3.5 of the 5 lumbar segments. ![]() Many clinicians use a version of the Schober skin distraction technique to measure spinal mobility, because it is easy, takes little training, and the equipment needed is inexpensive. They found that there was little evidence to support the current methods of measuring lumbar ROM. Littlewood and May conducted a systematic review on the validity of instruments used to measure lumbar ROM out of the 4 studies that were included on the review 3 were on dual inclinometry and 1 was on modified-modified Schober test. Previous studies have addressed the reliability and validity of different methods of measuring spinal range of motion, with variable conclusions. Hence the instruments used to quantify lumbar ROM should be reproducible between trials, raters and even within the same rater at different occasions amongst other clinical measurement properties. Physical impairment evaluation is a routine and an important aspect of management in low back pain.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |