ABSTRACT
Active range of motion of the cervical spine is one of the most common tools used to evaluate the quality of neck pain patients. Many measurement methods, for in instance an universal goniometers (UG), an inclinometers and a Cervical Range of Motion (CROM), have been employed to asses a magnitude of cervical range of motion , however there is a lack of the evidence to support the comparison of the reliability between the three measurement methods. The purpose of this study was to determine the intratester reliability of the three measurement methods in normal subjects. Ten subjects, aged 23.5 ± 1.9 years, were recruited in this study. Each subject was measured three times in each direction for each measurement method. Cervical flexion, extension and rotation were measured. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to quantify within-tester reliability. The results demonstrated that the CROM measurement method provided the highest reliability (ICC values range from 0.91 to 0.95) whereas the lowest reliability (ICC values range from 0.63 to 0.90) was obtained by the universal goniometer. Among these three measurement methods, the CROM provided the highest intratester reliability.
ABSTRACT
Background : Physical therapy treatment is one of the treatment used for the management of lumbar disc herniation and become more popular during resent years. Loss of function of lumbar spine is an essential problem for the back pain patient. Manual therapists sometimes select the technique of postero-anterior pressure (PA) to gain range in lumbar movements.Objectives : To measure the effect of postero-anterior pressure technique on lumbar spine movement in lumbar disc herniationDesign : An experimental studySetting : Srinagarind Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen UniversitySubjects and Methods : Forty patients who were diagnosed with lumbar disc herniation by Orthopaedics and Radiologists. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to a gold standard for diagnoses. Subjects were randomly assigned to a treatment or control group. The treatment group received both the lumbar traction and the postero-anterior pressures technique. The control group received only the lumbar traction.Measurements : The measurements consists of pain scale using the visual analogue, trunk movement and straight leg raising (SLR) using the inclinometer.Results : A Mann-Whitney U-test and Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) revealed no significant difference between groups in the pain level. A repeated measure ANOVA no showed no significant difference between groups both trunk movements and SLR degrees. Even though, the results of the pain scale, the trunk movements and the SLR in the treatment group were not found to be significant difference from the control group but there were a tendency.Conclusion : This study is the first study providing support for the use of postero-anterior