Seated cervical flexion-rotation test equivalent to supine for identifying cervical dysfunction in patients with dizziness/vertigo

2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-176
Author(s):  
Paul A. Ullucci ◽  
Andrew Kalach ◽  
Brian Reis ◽  
Soleil Avena ◽  
Rebecca Hinckley ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND: The upper cervical spine should be assessed in patients with complaints of dizziness or vertigo [1–3]. The supine cervical flexion-rotation test (SupCFRT) reliably assesses for the presence of upper cervical spine dysfunction (UCSD) [4]. UCSD has been linked to symptoms often seen in those diagnosed with dizziness or vertigo. Patients diagnosed with dizziness/vertigo often do not tolerate the supine testing position necessary to perform the SupCFRT, but often tolerate sitting well. PURPOSE: To determine if UCSD can be assessed in sitting as reliably as in supine. METHODS: Forty-five college age students (23.7±3.3 years old) acted as controls while forty-six subjects (56.71±14.6 years old) who were referred for physical therapy services by their medical provider acted as the patient group. The SupCFRT was performed first, [4] the Seated Cervical Flexion-Rotation Test (SeatCFRT) was performed next by positioning the subjects seated with their back against a high-backed chair, the head was flexed maximally, then rotated maximally left and right. The SupCFRT [4] and SeatCFRT were considered positive if range of motion limitations were found. Results for each test was compared using McNamar X2. RESULTS: There was no difference, p > 0.05, between SupCFRT and SeatCFRT for all conditions; all subjects (n = 91), control subjects n = 45, subjects referred to physical therapy for treatment of dizziness or vertigo, n = 46. DISCUSSION: The SeatCFRT reliably identifies the presence of UCSD, in controls and patients diagnosed by a referring medical provider for dizziness or vertigo. Patients, who do not tolerate the supine position, can be evaluated for UCSD in the seated position.

Author(s):  
Jacobo Rodríguez-Sanz ◽  
Miguel Malo-Urriés ◽  
Jaime Corral-de-Toro ◽  
Carlos López-de-Celis ◽  
María Orosia Lucha-López ◽  
...  

Chronic neck pain is one of today’s most prevalent pathologies. The International Classification of Diseases categorizes four subgroups based on patients’ associated symptoms. However, this classification does not encompass upper cervical spine dysfunction. The aim is to compare the short- and mid-term effectiveness of adding a manual therapy approach to a cervical exercise protocol in patients with chronic neck pain and upper cervical spine dysfunction. Fifty-eight subjects with chronic neck pain and upper cervical spine dysfunction were recruited (29 = Manual therapy + Exercise; 29 = Exercise). Each group received four 20-min sessions, one per week during four consecutive weeks, and a home exercise regime. Upper flexion and flexion-rotation test range of motion, neck disability index, craniocervical flexion test, visual analogue scale, pressure pain threshold, global rating of change scale, and adherence to self-treatment were assessed at the beginning, end of the intervention and at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. The Manual therapy + Exercise group statistically improved short- and medium-term in all variables compared to the Exercise group. Four 20-min sessions of Manual therapy + Exercise along with a home-exercise program is more effective in the short- to mid-term than an exercise protocol and a home-exercise program for patients with chronic neck pain and upper cervical dysfunction.


2011 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 167-171 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Takasaki ◽  
Toby Hall ◽  
Sadanori Oshiro ◽  
Shouta Kaneko ◽  
Yoshikazu Ikemoto ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerstin Luedtke ◽  
Thomas Schoettker-Königer ◽  
Toby Hall ◽  
Christine Reimer ◽  
Maike Grassold ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Headache is a common and costly health problem. Although the pathogenesis of headache is heterogeneous, reported contributing factors are dysfunctions of the upper cervical spine. The flexion rotation test (FRT) is a commonly used diagnostic test to detect upper cervical movement impairment. A digital goniometer may support precise measurement of movement impairment in the upper cervical spine. However, its reliability and validity is not assessed, yet. The aim of this study was to investigate the reliability and validity of the digital goniometer compared to an ultrasound-based movement analysis system. Methods Two separate cross-sectional studies were conducted using the digital goniometer EasyAngle (Meloq AB, Stockholm, Sweden) for a) investigating the concurrent validity of upper cervical range of motion (ROM) during the FRT and b) determining the inter- and intra-rater reliability in the target population of patients with head and neck pain. Sixty-two participants, 39 with and 23 without head and neck pain, were recruited for the concurrent validity study. For the reliability study, a total of 50 participants were recruited. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland Altmann plots were used to assess validity and ICC values, Bland Altmann plots as well as Kappa coefficients were used for estimating intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. Results Concurrent validity was strong with an ICC (2,1) of 0.97 for ROM to either side (95%CI = 0.95–0.98). Bland Altman Plots revealed a mean difference between measurement systems of 0.5° for the left and 0.11° for the right side. The inter-rater ICC (2,1) was 0.66 (95%CI 0.47–0.79, p <  0.001, SEM 6.6°), indicating good reliability. The limits of agreement were between 10.25° and − 11.89°, the mean difference between both raters was − 0.82°. Intra-rater reliability for the measurement of ROM during the FRT was between 0.96 (ICC 3,1) for rater 1 and 0.94 (ICC 3,1) for rater 2. Conclusions The digital goniometer demonstrated strong concurrent validity and good to strong reliability and can be used in clinical practice to accurately determine movement impairment in the upper cervical spine. Trial registration German Registry of Clinical Trials DRKS00013051.


Skull Base ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
Harminder Singh ◽  
Bartosz Grobelny ◽  
Adam Flanders ◽  
Marc Rosen ◽  
Paul Schiffmacher ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Marko Jug

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> In the case of tumor resection in the upper cervical spine, a multilevel laminectomy with instrumented fixation is required to prevent kyphotic deformity and myelopathy. Nevertheless, instrumentation of the cervical spine in children under the age of 8 years is challenging due to anatomical considerations and unavailability of specific instrumentation. <b><i>Case Presentation:</i></b> We present a case of 3D-printed model-assisted cervical spine instrumentation in a 4-year-old child with post-laminectomy kyphotic decompensation of the cervical spine and spinal cord injury 1 year after medulloblastoma metastasis resection in the upper cervical spine. Due to unavailability of specific instrumentation, 3D virtual planning was used to assess and plan posterior cervical fixation. Fixation with 3.5 mm lateral mass and isthmic screws was suggested and the feasibility of fixation was confirmed “in vitro” in a 3D-printed model preoperatively to reduce the possibility of intraoperative implant-spine mismatch. Intraoperative conditions completely resembled the preoperative plan and 3.5 mm polyaxial screws were successfully used as planned. Postoperatively the child made a complete neurological recovery and 2 years after the instrumented fusion is still disease free with no signs of spinal decompensation. <b><i>Discussion/Conclusion:</i></b> Our case shows that posterior cervical fixation with the conventional screw-rod technique in a 4-year-old child is feasible, but we suggest that suitability and positioning of the chosen implants are preoperatively assessed in a printed 3D model. In addition, a printed 3D model offers the possibility to better visualize and sense spinal anatomy “in vivo,” thereby helping screw placement and reducing the chance for intraoperative complications, especially in the absence of intraoperative spinal navigation.


1981 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-47
Author(s):  
M. Yamanaka ◽  
G. Awaya ◽  
S. Takata ◽  
N. Nishijima ◽  
S. Shimamura

2015 ◽  
Vol 101 (4) ◽  
pp. 519-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Mirouse ◽  
A. Journe ◽  
L. Casabianca ◽  
P.E. Moreau ◽  
S. Pannier ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document