Reliability of thoracic spine rotation range-of-motion measurements in healthy adults

Katherine D. Johnson, Kyung Min Kim, Byung Kyu Yu, Susan A. Saliba, Terry L. Grindstaff

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Context: The reliability of clinical techniques to quantify thoracic spine rotation range of motion (ROM) has not been evaluated. Objective: To determine the intratester and intertester reliability of 5 thoracic rotation measurement techniques. Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Setting: University research laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: Forty-six healthy volunteers (age = 23.6±4.3 years, height = 171.0±9.6 cm, mass = 71.4 ±16.7 kg). Main Outcome Measure(s): We tested 5 thoracic rotation ROM techniques over 2 days: seated rotation (bar in back and front), half-kneeling rotation (bar in back and front), and lumbar-locked rotation. On day 1, 2 examiners obtained 2 sets of measurements (sessions 1, 2) to determine the within-session intertester reliability and within-day intratester reliability. A single examiner obtained measurements on day 2 (session 3) to determine the intratester reliability between days. Each technique was performed 3 times per side, and averages were used for data analysis. Reliability was determined using intraclass correlation coefficients, standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC). Differences between raters during session 1 were determined using paired t tests. Results: Within-session intertester reliability estimates ranged from 0.85 to 0.94. Ranges for the SEM were 1.0° to 2.3° and for the MDC were 2.8° to 6.3°. No differences were seen between examiners during session 1 for seated rotation (bar in front, both sides), half-kneeling rotation (bar in front, left side), or the lumbar locked position (both sides) (all values of P>.05). Within-day intratester reliability estimates ranged from 0.86 to 0.95. Ranges for the SEM were 0.8° to 2.1° and for the MDC were 2.1° to 5.9°. Between-days intratester reliability estimates ranged from 0.84 to 0.91. Ranges for the SEM were 1.4° to 2.0° and for the MDC were 3.9° to 5.6°. Conclusions: All techniques had good reliability and low levels of measurement error. The seated rotation, bar in front, and lumbar-locked rotation tests may be used reliably when more than 1 examiner is obtaining measurements.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)52-60
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Athletic Training
Volume47
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 2012

Fingerprint

Articular Range of Motion
Spine
Thorax
Healthy Volunteers
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

Cite this

Reliability of thoracic spine rotation range-of-motion measurements in healthy adults. / Johnson, Katherine D.; Kim, Kyung Min; Yu, Byung Kyu; Saliba, Susan A.; Grindstaff, Terry L.

In: Journal of Athletic Training, Vol. 47, No. 1, 01.2012, p. 52-60.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Johnson, Katherine D. ; Kim, Kyung Min ; Yu, Byung Kyu ; Saliba, Susan A. ; Grindstaff, Terry L. / Reliability of thoracic spine rotation range-of-motion measurements in healthy adults. In: Journal of Athletic Training. 2012 ; Vol. 47, No. 1. pp. 52-60.
@article{392bac0656884130b0412db2642d9759,
title = "Reliability of thoracic spine rotation range-of-motion measurements in healthy adults",
abstract = "Context: The reliability of clinical techniques to quantify thoracic spine rotation range of motion (ROM) has not been evaluated. Objective: To determine the intratester and intertester reliability of 5 thoracic rotation measurement techniques. Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Setting: University research laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: Forty-six healthy volunteers (age = 23.6±4.3 years, height = 171.0±9.6 cm, mass = 71.4 ±16.7 kg). Main Outcome Measure(s): We tested 5 thoracic rotation ROM techniques over 2 days: seated rotation (bar in back and front), half-kneeling rotation (bar in back and front), and lumbar-locked rotation. On day 1, 2 examiners obtained 2 sets of measurements (sessions 1, 2) to determine the within-session intertester reliability and within-day intratester reliability. A single examiner obtained measurements on day 2 (session 3) to determine the intratester reliability between days. Each technique was performed 3 times per side, and averages were used for data analysis. Reliability was determined using intraclass correlation coefficients, standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC). Differences between raters during session 1 were determined using paired t tests. Results: Within-session intertester reliability estimates ranged from 0.85 to 0.94. Ranges for the SEM were 1.0° to 2.3° and for the MDC were 2.8° to 6.3°. No differences were seen between examiners during session 1 for seated rotation (bar in front, both sides), half-kneeling rotation (bar in front, left side), or the lumbar locked position (both sides) (all values of P>.05). Within-day intratester reliability estimates ranged from 0.86 to 0.95. Ranges for the SEM were 0.8° to 2.1° and for the MDC were 2.1° to 5.9°. Between-days intratester reliability estimates ranged from 0.84 to 0.91. Ranges for the SEM were 1.4° to 2.0° and for the MDC were 3.9° to 5.6°. Conclusions: All techniques had good reliability and low levels of measurement error. The seated rotation, bar in front, and lumbar-locked rotation tests may be used reliably when more than 1 examiner is obtaining measurements.",
author = "Johnson, {Katherine D.} and Kim, {Kyung Min} and Yu, {Byung Kyu} and Saliba, {Susan A.} and Grindstaff, {Terry L.}",
year = "2012",
month = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "47",
pages = "52--60",
journal = "Journal of Athletic Training",
issn = "1062-6050",
publisher = "National Athletic Trainers' Association Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reliability of thoracic spine rotation range-of-motion measurements in healthy adults

AU - Johnson, Katherine D.

AU - Kim, Kyung Min

AU - Yu, Byung Kyu

AU - Saliba, Susan A.

AU - Grindstaff, Terry L.

PY - 2012/1

Y1 - 2012/1

N2 - Context: The reliability of clinical techniques to quantify thoracic spine rotation range of motion (ROM) has not been evaluated. Objective: To determine the intratester and intertester reliability of 5 thoracic rotation measurement techniques. Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Setting: University research laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: Forty-six healthy volunteers (age = 23.6±4.3 years, height = 171.0±9.6 cm, mass = 71.4 ±16.7 kg). Main Outcome Measure(s): We tested 5 thoracic rotation ROM techniques over 2 days: seated rotation (bar in back and front), half-kneeling rotation (bar in back and front), and lumbar-locked rotation. On day 1, 2 examiners obtained 2 sets of measurements (sessions 1, 2) to determine the within-session intertester reliability and within-day intratester reliability. A single examiner obtained measurements on day 2 (session 3) to determine the intratester reliability between days. Each technique was performed 3 times per side, and averages were used for data analysis. Reliability was determined using intraclass correlation coefficients, standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC). Differences between raters during session 1 were determined using paired t tests. Results: Within-session intertester reliability estimates ranged from 0.85 to 0.94. Ranges for the SEM were 1.0° to 2.3° and for the MDC were 2.8° to 6.3°. No differences were seen between examiners during session 1 for seated rotation (bar in front, both sides), half-kneeling rotation (bar in front, left side), or the lumbar locked position (both sides) (all values of P>.05). Within-day intratester reliability estimates ranged from 0.86 to 0.95. Ranges for the SEM were 0.8° to 2.1° and for the MDC were 2.1° to 5.9°. Between-days intratester reliability estimates ranged from 0.84 to 0.91. Ranges for the SEM were 1.4° to 2.0° and for the MDC were 3.9° to 5.6°. Conclusions: All techniques had good reliability and low levels of measurement error. The seated rotation, bar in front, and lumbar-locked rotation tests may be used reliably when more than 1 examiner is obtaining measurements.

AB - Context: The reliability of clinical techniques to quantify thoracic spine rotation range of motion (ROM) has not been evaluated. Objective: To determine the intratester and intertester reliability of 5 thoracic rotation measurement techniques. Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Setting: University research laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: Forty-six healthy volunteers (age = 23.6±4.3 years, height = 171.0±9.6 cm, mass = 71.4 ±16.7 kg). Main Outcome Measure(s): We tested 5 thoracic rotation ROM techniques over 2 days: seated rotation (bar in back and front), half-kneeling rotation (bar in back and front), and lumbar-locked rotation. On day 1, 2 examiners obtained 2 sets of measurements (sessions 1, 2) to determine the within-session intertester reliability and within-day intratester reliability. A single examiner obtained measurements on day 2 (session 3) to determine the intratester reliability between days. Each technique was performed 3 times per side, and averages were used for data analysis. Reliability was determined using intraclass correlation coefficients, standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC). Differences between raters during session 1 were determined using paired t tests. Results: Within-session intertester reliability estimates ranged from 0.85 to 0.94. Ranges for the SEM were 1.0° to 2.3° and for the MDC were 2.8° to 6.3°. No differences were seen between examiners during session 1 for seated rotation (bar in front, both sides), half-kneeling rotation (bar in front, left side), or the lumbar locked position (both sides) (all values of P>.05). Within-day intratester reliability estimates ranged from 0.86 to 0.95. Ranges for the SEM were 0.8° to 2.1° and for the MDC were 2.1° to 5.9°. Between-days intratester reliability estimates ranged from 0.84 to 0.91. Ranges for the SEM were 1.4° to 2.0° and for the MDC were 3.9° to 5.6°. Conclusions: All techniques had good reliability and low levels of measurement error. The seated rotation, bar in front, and lumbar-locked rotation tests may be used reliably when more than 1 examiner is obtaining measurements.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84859262024&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84859262024&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 47

SP - 52

EP - 60

JO - Journal of Athletic Training

JF - Journal of Athletic Training

SN - 1062-6050

IS - 1

ER -