ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess interrater and intrarater reliability and validity for single inclinometry (SI) and dual inclinometry (DI) assessment of cervical lateral flexion (CLF) range of motion and compare reliability in a practicing physical therapist (PT) and student PTs (SPTs). METHODS: Twenty-four subjects performed right and left CLF while SI, DI, and 3-dimensional kinematics were concurrently recorded. Subjects were reassessed by 2 SPTs and 1 PT using both SI and DI. Each subject was measured twice per rater in round-robin fashion. RESULTS: There were significant positive relationships between DI and motion capture for both right (r = 0.841; P < .01) and left lateral flexion (r = 0.838; P < .01). Single inclinometry also had a significant correlation with motion capture for right (r = 0.927, P < .01) and left (r = 0.834, P < .01) lateral flexion. Interrater reliability was good for both SI and DI methods. For SI, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (3,1) was 0.905 and 0.870 for right and left CLF, respectively. For DI, ICC(3,1) was 0.803 and 0.757 for right and left CLF, respectively. Intrarater reliability was good for both methods. Average SI values were ICC(2,1) of 0.928 and 0.897 for right and left CLF, respectively. Average DI values were ICC(2,1) of 0.882 and 0.851 for left and right, respectively. Although not significant, the PT had slightly higher reliability in all measures (range, 0.881-0.935) compared to the SPTs (range, 0.880-0.925). CONCLUSIONS: Both SI and DI are acceptable for clinical use and both are reliable measurement methods for CLF between raters and for repeated measures. There are minimal differences in reliability between a PT with experience and SPTs with minimal experience.
Subject(s)
Cervical Vertebrae/physiology , Range of Motion, Articular/physiology , Biomechanical Phenomena , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Observer Variation , Physical Examination/methods , Physical Examination/statistics & numerical data , Reproducibility of Results , Young AdultABSTRACT
STUDY DESIGN: Clinical measurement. OBJECTIVES: To determine the interrater and intrarater reliability of the active hip abduction (AHAbd) test. BACKGROUND: The AHAbd test is used to assess lumbopelvic movement during a dynamic lower limb activity. The test has previously been shown to predict low back pain development during a prolonged standing exposure in previously asymptomatic individuals. As an observation-based assessment for which rater reliability has not been established, similar scoring on the test between clinicians is essential. METHODS: One hundred twenty-eight video clips of participants performing the AHAbd test were recorded. Sixteen practicing physical therapists scored test performance by viewing 20 preselected videos to establish interrater reliability. Fourteen of the 16 raters rescored the videos after a 3-week period to establish intrarater reliability. Demographic data were collected for all raters. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated for reliability statistics. Correlations were performed between demographic data and ICCs. RESULTS: Interrater reliability (ICC2,1) for the test using the 4-point scale was 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56, 0.84) and 0.59 (95% CI: 0.43, 0.76) when the scale was dichotomized into positive/negative scores. Intrarater reliability (ICC3,1) was 0.74 on average. Demographic characteristics were not significantly associated with reliability scores. CONCLUSION: Interrater and intrarater reliability for scoring of the AHAbd test by practicing clinicians was similar, regardless of experience level or practice setting. The AHAbd test can be considered to be a reliable observational tool.
