scholarly journals Reliability and concurrent validity of an alternative method of lateral lumbar range of motion in athletes

2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Hecimovich
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Index Test ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Rater Reliability

Background: Cricket bowling involves combined spinalmovements of side bending and rotation and, consequently, injuryto the low back is a common problem. Therefore the assessmentof lumbar spine kinematics has become a routine component inpreseason screening. This includes static measurement of lateralspinal flexion as asymmetrical range of motion may predispose anathlete to low back injury.Objectives: This study examined intra-rater reliability andconcurrent validity of the fingertip-to-floor distance test (FFD)when compared to a criterion range of motion measure.Methods: Thirty-four junior-level cricket players aged 13‑16years were recruited. Lumbar spine lateral flexion was measuredsimultaneously with the fingertip-to-floor distance test and digitalinclinometry methods. Relative and absolute intra-rater reliabilitywere investigated with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC3,1)of agreement, standard error of measurement (SEM) estimates,Bland and Altman bias estimates and 95% limits of agreement,respectively. The concurrent validity of the fingertip-to-floordistance test, compared to digital inclinometry measures, wasexamined with Pearson correlation coefficients.Results: Intra-rater reliability demonstrated substantial agreementfor both measures (ICC3,1 > 0.84). The fingertip-to-floor distancetest SEM values ranged from 1.71‑2.01 cm with an estimatedminimum detectable change (MDC) threshold of 4.73‑5.55 cm.The inclinometry SEM values ranged from 1.00‑1.09° withminimal detectable change estimates of 2.77‑3.01°. There werestrong correlations between the index test and criterion measureoutcomes (r > 0.84, p < 0.001).Conclusions: This study’s results support the intra-rater reliabilityand concurrent validity of the finger-to-floor distance test,suggesting it to be a suitable surrogate measure for lumbar lateralflexion testing

scholarly journals Reliability and validity of an iPhone®application for the measurement of lumbar spine flexion and extension range of motion

PeerJ ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. e2355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Reza Pourahmadi ◽  
Morteza Taghipour ◽  
Elham Jannati ◽  
Mohammad Ali Mohseni-Bandpei ◽  
Ismail Ebrahimi Takamjani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Medical Science ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Rater Reliability ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Flexion And Extension

BackgroundMeasurement of lumbar spine range of motion (ROM) is often considered to be an essential component of lumbar spine physiotherapy and orthopedic assessment. The measurement can be carried out through various instruments such as inclinometers, goniometers, and etc. Recent smartphones have been equipped with accelerometers and magnetometers, which, through specific software applications (apps) can be used for inclinometric functions.PurposeThe main purpose was to investigate the reliability and validity of an iPhone®app (TiltMeter©-advanced level and inclinometer) for measuring standing lumbar spine flexion–extension ROM in asymptomatic subjects.DesignA cross-sectional study was carried out.SettingThis study was conducted in a physiotherapy clinic located at School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Science and Health Services, Tehran, Iran.SubjectsA convenience sample of 30 asymptomatic adults (15 males; 15 females; age range = 18–55 years) was recruited between August 2015 and December 2015.MethodsFollowing a 2–minute warm-up, the subjects were asked to stand in a relaxed position and their skin was marked at the T12–L1and S1–S2spinal levels. From this position, they were asked to perform maximum lumbar flexion followed by maximum lumbar extension with their knees straight. Two blinded raters each used an inclinometer and the iPhone®app to measure lumbar spine flexion–extension ROM. A third rater read the measured angles. To calculate total lumbar spine flexion–extension ROM, the measurement from S1–S2was subtracted from T12–L1. The second (2 hours later) and third (48 hours later) sessions were carried out in the same manner as the first session. All of the measurements were conducted 3 times and the mean value of 3 repetitions for each measurement was used for analysis. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) models (3, k) and (2, k) were used to determine the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability, respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficients were used to establish concurrent validity of the iPhone®app. Furthermore, minimum detectable change at the 95% confidence level (MDC95) was computed as 1.96 × standard error of measurement × $\sqrt{2}$.ResultsGood to excellent intra-rater and inter-rater reliability were demonstrated for both the gravity-based inclinometer with ICC values of ≥0.84 and ≥0.77 and the iPhone®app with ICC values of ≥0.85 and ≥0.85, respectively. The MDC95ranged from 5.82°to 8.18°for the intra-rater analysis and from 7.38°to 8.66° for the inter-rater analysis. The concurrent validity for flexion and extension between the 2 instruments was 0.85 and 0.91, respectively.ConclusionsThe iPhone®app possesses good to excellent intra-rater and inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity. It seems that the iPhone®app can be used for the measurement of lumbar spine flexion–extension ROM.Level of evidenceIIb.

scholarly journals Adaptation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Chinese Counseling Competencies Scale-Revised

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Xia ◽  
William Ho Cheung Li ◽  
Tingna Liang ◽  
Yuanhui Luo ◽  
Laurie Long Kwan Ho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Psychometric Evaluation ◽  
Counseling Competencies ◽  
Counselors In Training ◽  
Rater Reliability ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Objectives: This study conducted a linguistic and psychometric evaluation of the Chinese Counseling Competencies Scale-Revised (CCS-R).Methods: The Chinese CCS-R was created from the original English version using a standard forward-backward translation process. The psychometric properties of the Chinese CCS-R were examined in a cohort of 208 counselors-in-training by two independent raters. Fifty-three counselors-in-training were asked to undergo another counseling performance evaluation for the test-retest. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted for the Chinese CCS-R, followed by internal consistency, test-retest reliability, inter-rater reliability, convergent validity, and concurrent validity.Results: The results of the CFA supported the factorial validity of the Chinese CCS-R, with adequate construct replicability. The scale had a McDonald's omega of 0.876, and intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.63 and 0.90 for test-retest reliability and inter-rater reliability, respectively. Significantly positive correlations were observed between the Chinese CCS-R score and scores of performance checklist (Pearson's γ = 0.781), indicating a large convergent validity, and knowledge on drug abuse (Pearson's γ = 0.833), indicating a moderate concurrent validity.Conclusion: The results support that the Chinese CCS-R is a valid and reliable measure of the counseling competencies.Practice implication: The CCS-R provides trainers with a reliable tool to evaluate counseling students' competencies and to facilitate discussions with trainees about their areas for growth.

scholarly journals The Brazilian version of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Clinician rating scale (NPI-C): reliability and validity in dementia

2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (9) ◽  
pp. 1503-1511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florindo Stella ◽  
Orestes Vicente Forlenza ◽  
Jerson Laks ◽  
Larissa Pires de Andrade ◽  
Michelle A. Ljubetic Avendaño ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Neuropsychiatric Symptoms ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Neuropsychiatric Inventory ◽  
Rater Reliability ◽  
Clinician Rating

ABSTRACTBackground:Patients with dementia may be unable to describe their symptoms, and caregivers frequently suffer emotional burden that can interfere with judgment of the patient's behavior. The Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Clinician rating scale (NPI-C) was therefore developed as a comprehensive and versatile instrument to assess and accurately measure neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) in dementia, thereby using information from caregiver and patient interviews, and any other relevant available data. The present study is a follow-up to the original, cross-national NPI-C validation, evaluating the reliability and concurrent validity of the NPI-C in quantifying psychopathological symptoms in dementia in a large Brazilian cohort.Methods:Two blinded raters evaluated 312 participants (156 patient-knowledgeable informant dyads) using the NPI-C for a total of 624 observations in five Brazilian centers. Inter-rater reliability was determined through intraclass correlation coefficients for the NPI-C domains and the traditional NPI. Convergent validity included correlations of specific domains of the NPI-C with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Index (CMAI), the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD), and the Apathy Inventory (AI).Results:Inter-rater reliability was strong for all NPI-C domains. There were high correlations between NPI-C/delusions and BPRS, NPI-C/apathy-indifference with the AI, NPI-C/depression-dysphoria with the CSDD, NPI-C/agitation with the CMAI, and NPI-C/aggression with the CMAI. There was moderate correlation between the NPI-C/aberrant vocalizations and CMAI and the NPI-C/hallucinations with the BPRS.Conclusion:The NPI-C is a comprehensive tool that provides accurate measurement of NPS in dementia with high concurrent validity and inter-rater reliability in the Brazilian setting. In addition to universal assessment, the NPI-C can be completed by individual domains.

Reliability of Hip Rotation Range of Motion in Supine and Seated Positions

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marissa C. Gradoz ◽  
Lauren E. Bauer ◽  
Terry L. Grindstaff ◽  
Jennifer J. Bagwell
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Minimal Detectable Change ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Spine Pathology ◽  
Hip Rotation

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.

scholarly journals Reliability of radiographic measurements of knee motion following knee arthroplasty for use in a virtual knee clinic

2012 ◽  
Vol 94 (7) ◽  
pp. 506-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Phillips ◽  
A Goubran ◽  
S Naim ◽  
D Searle ◽  
V Mandalia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Radiographic Measurement ◽  
Perfect Agreement ◽  
Rater Reliability ◽  
Active Flexion ◽  
Radiographic Measurements ◽  
Set Up

INTRODUCTION We sought to validate radiographic measurements of range of motion of the knee after arthroplasty as part of a new system of virtual clinics. METHODS The range of motion of 52 knees in 45 patients was obtained by 2 clinicians using standardised techniques and goniometers. Inter-rater reliability and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated. Radiographs of these patients’ knees in full active flexion and extension were also used to calculate intra and inter-rater reliability compared with clinical measurements using four different methods for plotting angles on the radiographs. RESULTS The ICC for inter-rater reliability using the goniometer was very high. The ICC was 0.91 in extension and 0.85 in flexion while repeatability was 8.49° (-8.03–8.99°) in extension and 5.23° (-4.54–5.74°) in flexion. The best ICC for radiographic measurement in extension was 0.86, indicating ‘near perfect’ agreement, and repeatability was 5.43° (-4.04–6.12°). The best ICC in flexion was 0.95 and repeatability was 5.82° (-3.38–6.55°). The ICC for intrarater reliability was 0.98 for extension and 0.99 for flexion on radiographic measurements. CONCLUSIONS Validating the use of radiographs to reliably measure range of motion following knee arthroplasty has allowed us to set up a ‘virtual knee clinic’. Combining validated questionnaires and radiographic measurement of range of motion, we aim to maintain high quality patient surveillance following knee arthroplasty, reduce our ratio for new to follow-up patients in line with Department of Health guidelines and improve patient satisfaction through reduced travel to hospital outpatients.

scholarly journals Development of the English Listening and Reading Computerized Revised Token Test Into Cantonese: Validity, Reliability, and Sensitivity/Specificity in People With Aphasia and Healthy Controls

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (11) ◽  
pp. 3743-3759
Author(s):  
Mehdi Bakhtiar ◽  
Min Ney Wong ◽  
Emily Ka Yin Tsui ◽  
Malcolm R. McNeil
Keyword(s):  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Healthy Controls ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Token Test ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
High Test

Purpose This study reports the psychometric development of the Cantonese versions of the English Computerized Revised Token Test (CRTT) for persons with aphasia (PWAs) and healthy controls (HCs). Method The English CRTT was translated into standard Chinese for the Reading–Word Fade version (CRTT-R- WF -Cantonese) and into formal Cantonese for the Listening version (CRTT-L-Cantonese). Thirty-two adult native Cantonese PWAs and 42 HCs were tested on both versions of CRTT-Cantonese tests and on the Cantonese Aphasia Battery to measure the construct and concurrent validity of CRTT-Cantonese tests. The HCs were retested on both versions of the CRTT-Cantonese tests, whereas the PWAs were randomly assigned for retesting on either version to measure the test–retest reliability. Results A two-way, Group × Modality, repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed significantly lower scores for the PWA group than the HC group for both reading and listening. Other comparisons were not significant. A high and significant correlation was found between the CRTT-R- WF -Cantonese and the CRTT-L-Cantonese in PWAs, and 87% of the PWAs showed nonsignificantly different performance across the CRTT-Cantonese tests based on the Revised Standardized Difference Test. The CRTT-R- WF -Cantonese provided better aphasia diagnostic sensitivity (100%) and specificity (83.30%) values than the CRTT-L-Cantonese. Pearson correlation coefficients revealed significant moderate correlations between the Cantonese Aphasia Battery scores and the CRTT-Cantonese tests in PWAs, supporting adequate concurrent validity. Intraclass correlation coefficient showed high test–retest reliability (between .82 and .96, p < .001) for both CRTT-Cantonese tests for both groups. Conclusions Results support that the validly translated CRTT-R- WF -Cantonese and CRTT-L-Cantonese tests significantly differentiate the reading and listening comprehension of PWAs from HCs and provides acceptable concurrent validity and high test–retest reliability for both tests. Furthermore, favorable PWA versus HC sensitivity and specificity cutoff scores are presented for both CRTT-Cantonese listening and reading tests.

INTRA-RATER RELIABILITIES AND CONCURRENT VALIDITY OF THE UNIVERSAL GONIOMETER AND TAPE MEASURE FOR MEASURING CERVICAL ACTIVE RANGE OF MOTION

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (01) ◽  
pp. 1550005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Babatunde Olusola Adeleke Adegoke ◽  
Maureen Ngozi Offiah ◽  
Emmanuel Chiebuka Okoye ◽  
Christopher Olusanjo Akosile
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Lateral Flexion ◽  
Rater Reliability ◽  
Acceptable Range ◽  
Tape Measure ◽  
Active Range Of Motion ◽  
Level Of Significance

Background Data: Cervical active range of motion (cervical AROM) is often assessed in clinical practice to quantify musculoskeletal impairments of the neck and evaluate efficacy of interventions. Such assessment requires instruments with proven reliability and validity. Purpose: To investigate and compare the intra-rater reliabilities and concurrent validity of the universal goniometer and tape measure in measuring cervical AROM. Methods: Cervical AROM in 100 consecutively sampled apparently healthy individuals was measured with both universal goniometer and tape measure and repeated after five days. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics, standard error of measurement, Pearson product moment correlation and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) at 0.05 level of significance. Results: Intra-rater reliability of the tape measure (r = 0.28–0.62; ICC = 0.44–0.75) and universal goniometer (r = 0.21–0.67; ICC = 0.34–0.79) were within the acceptable range except for right lateral flexion for goniometer and left lateral flexion for tape measure. Standard errors of measurement were 0.14–0.20 and 0.76–1.27 for tape measure and goniometer, respectively. Concurrent validity coefficients of the two instruments for all cervical AROM (r = 0.23–0.40) except left lateral flexion and right rotation were within the acceptable range. There was no gender difference in cervical AROM using the goniometer but male participants had significantly more range in flexion and right lateral flexion using the tape measure. Conclusions: Tape measure and goniometer have similar intra-rater reliability and significant but weak concurrent validity in assessing cervical AROM except left lateral flexion and right rotation.

scholarly journals The Reliability and Validity of the Computerized Double Inclinometer in Measuring Lumbar Mobility

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 355-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joy Christine MacDermid ◽  
Vanitha Arumugam ◽  
Joshua Israel Vincent ◽  
Krista L Carroll
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Sagittal Plane ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Rater Reliability ◽  
Spinal Motion ◽  
Lumbar Range Of Motion

Study Design : Repeated measures reliability/validity study. Objectives : To determine the concurrent validity, test-retest, inter-rater and intra-rater reliability of lumbar flexion and extension measurements using the Tracker M.E. computerized dual inclinometer (CDI) in comparison to the modified-modified Schober (MMS) Summary of Background : Numerous studies have evaluated the reliability and validity of the various methods of measuring spinal motion, but the results are inconsistent. Differences in equipment and techniques make it difficult to correlate results. Methods : Twenty subjects with back pain and twenty without back pain were selected through convenience sampling. Two examiners measured sagittal plane lumbar range of motion for each subject. Two separate tests with the CDI and one test with the MMS were conducted. Each test consisted of three trials. Instrument and examiner order was randomly assigned. Intra-class correlations (ICCs 2, 2 and 2, 2) and Pearson correlation coefficients (r) were used to calculate reliability and concurrent validity respectively. Results : Intra-trial reliability was high to very high for both the CDI (ICCs 0.85 - 0.96) and MMS (ICCs 0.84 - 0.98). However, the reliability was poor to moderate, when the CDI unit had to be repositioned either by the same rate (ICCs 0.16 - 0.59) or a different rater (ICCs 0.45 - 0.52). Inter-rater reliability for the MMS was moderate to high (ICCs 0.75 - 0.82) which bettered the moderate correlation obtained for the CDI (ICCs 0.45 - 0.52). Correlations between the CDI and MMS were poor for flexion (0.32; p<0.05) and poor to moderate (-0.42 - -0.51; p<0.05) for extension measurements. Conclusion : When using the CDI, an average of subsequent tests is required to obtain moderate reliability. The MMS was highly reliable than the CDI. The MMS and the CDI measure lumbar movement on a different metric that are not highly related to each other.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document