Abstract
Context: Hip rotation range of motion (ROM) is commonly assessed in individuals with lower extremity or spine pathology. It remains unknown which hip rotation ROM testing position is most reliable. Objective: To compare interrater and intrarater reliabilities between hip internal rotation (IR) and external rotation (ER) ROM in supine and seated positions. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Setting: University research laboratory. Participants: A total of 19 participants (11 females and 8 males; age = 23.5 [1.2] y; height = 173.2 [8.6] cm; and mass = 69.2 [13.4] kg) without hip, knee, low back, or sacroiliac pain within the preceding 3 months or history of hip or low back surgery were recruited. Interventions: Three testers obtained measures during 2 testing sessions. Passive supine and seated hip IR and ER ROM were performed with the hip and knee flexed to 90°. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measures were hip IR and ER ROM in supine and seated positions (in degrees). Interrater and intrarater reliabilities were calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Minimal detectable change was calculated. Differences between supine and seated hip IR and ER ROM values were assessed using paired t tests (significance level was .05). Results: Supine hip IR and ER ROM interrater and intrarater reliabilities were excellent (ICC = .75-.91). Seated hip IR ROM interrater and intrarater reliabilities were good (ICC = .64-.71). Seated hip ER ROM interrater reliability was good (ICC = .65), and intrarater reliabilities were good to excellent (ICC = .65-.82). Minimal detectable change values for supine and seated hip IR and ER ROM ranged from 6.1° to 8.6°. There were significant differences between supine and seated positions for hip IR and ER ROM (41.6° vs 44.5° P < .01 and 53.0° vs 44.2° P < .01, respectively). Conclusion: Supine hip rotation had higher interrater and intrarater reliabilities. Hip IR and ER ROM values differed significantly between supine and seated positions and should not be used interchangeably.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-4 |
| Number of pages | 4 |
| Journal | Journal of Sport Rehabilitation |
| Volume | 27 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jul 1 2018 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Biophysics
- Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
- Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
- Rehabilitation
Cite this
Reliability of hip rotation range of motion in supine and seated positions. / Gradoz, Marissa C.; Bauer, Lauren E.; Grindstaff, Terry L.; Bagwell, Jennifer.
In: Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, Vol. 27, No. 4, 01.07.2018, p. 1-4.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Reliability of hip rotation range of motion in supine and seated positions
AU - Gradoz, Marissa C.
AU - Bauer, Lauren E.
AU - Grindstaff, Terry L.
AU - Bagwell, Jennifer
PY - 2018/7/1
Y1 - 2018/7/1
N2 - Context: Hip rotation range of motion (ROM) is commonly assessed in individuals with lower extremity or spine pathology. It remains unknown which hip rotation ROM testing position is most reliable. Objective: To compare interrater and intrarater reliabilities between hip internal rotation (IR) and external rotation (ER) ROM in supine and seated positions. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Setting: University research laboratory. Participants: A total of 19 participants (11 females and 8 males; age = 23.5 [1.2] y; height = 173.2 [8.6] cm; and mass = 69.2 [13.4] kg) without hip, knee, low back, or sacroiliac pain within the preceding 3 months or history of hip or low back surgery were recruited. Interventions: Three testers obtained measures during 2 testing sessions. Passive supine and seated hip IR and ER ROM were performed with the hip and knee flexed to 90°. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measures were hip IR and ER ROM in supine and seated positions (in degrees). Interrater and intrarater reliabilities were calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Minimal detectable change was calculated. Differences between supine and seated hip IR and ER ROM values were assessed using paired t tests (significance level was .05). Results: Supine hip IR and ER ROM interrater and intrarater reliabilities were excellent (ICC = .75-.91). Seated hip IR ROM interrater and intrarater reliabilities were good (ICC = .64-.71). Seated hip ER ROM interrater reliability was good (ICC = .65), and intrarater reliabilities were good to excellent (ICC = .65-.82). Minimal detectable change values for supine and seated hip IR and ER ROM ranged from 6.1° to 8.6°. There were significant differences between supine and seated positions for hip IR and ER ROM (41.6° vs 44.5° P < .01 and 53.0° vs 44.2° P < .01, respectively). Conclusion: Supine hip rotation had higher interrater and intrarater reliabilities. Hip IR and ER ROM values differed significantly between supine and seated positions and should not be used interchangeably.
AB - Context: Hip rotation range of motion (ROM) is commonly assessed in individuals with lower extremity or spine pathology. It remains unknown which hip rotation ROM testing position is most reliable. Objective: To compare interrater and intrarater reliabilities between hip internal rotation (IR) and external rotation (ER) ROM in supine and seated positions. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Setting: University research laboratory. Participants: A total of 19 participants (11 females and 8 males; age = 23.5 [1.2] y; height = 173.2 [8.6] cm; and mass = 69.2 [13.4] kg) without hip, knee, low back, or sacroiliac pain within the preceding 3 months or history of hip or low back surgery were recruited. Interventions: Three testers obtained measures during 2 testing sessions. Passive supine and seated hip IR and ER ROM were performed with the hip and knee flexed to 90°. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measures were hip IR and ER ROM in supine and seated positions (in degrees). Interrater and intrarater reliabilities were calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Minimal detectable change was calculated. Differences between supine and seated hip IR and ER ROM values were assessed using paired t tests (significance level was .05). Results: Supine hip IR and ER ROM interrater and intrarater reliabilities were excellent (ICC = .75-.91). Seated hip IR ROM interrater and intrarater reliabilities were good (ICC = .64-.71). Seated hip ER ROM interrater reliability was good (ICC = .65), and intrarater reliabilities were good to excellent (ICC = .65-.82). Minimal detectable change values for supine and seated hip IR and ER ROM ranged from 6.1° to 8.6°. There were significant differences between supine and seated positions for hip IR and ER ROM (41.6° vs 44.5° P < .01 and 53.0° vs 44.2° P < .01, respectively). Conclusion: Supine hip rotation had higher interrater and intrarater reliabilities. Hip IR and ER ROM values differed significantly between supine and seated positions and should not be used interchangeably.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050523595&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85050523595&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1123/jsr.2017-0243
DO - 10.1123/jsr.2017-0243
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85050523595
VL - 27
SP - 1
EP - 4
JO - Journal of Sport Rehabilitation
JF - Journal of Sport Rehabilitation
SN - 1056-6716
IS - 4
ER -