Reproducibility and instrument validity of a new ultrasonography-based system for measuring cervical spine kinematics

Clinical Biomechanics

Volumn 15, Issue 9, 2000, Pages 658-664

  Dvir, Zeevi ^a   Prushansky, Tamara ^a  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

Cervical spine; Measurement; Motion; Reproducibility

Indexed keywords

BIOMECHANICS; KINEMATICS; MEDICAL IMAGING; ULTRASONIC IMAGING;

DIGITAL INCLINOMETERS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

BONE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CERVICAL SPINE INJURY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; ECHOGRAPHY; ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEAD MOVEMENT; HUMAN; MALE; MEASUREMENT; POTENTIOMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; TASK PERFORMANCE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ADULT; BIOMECHANICS; CALIBRATION; CERVICAL VERTEBRAE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NECK; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; REFERENCE VALUES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 0034333672     PISSN: 02680033     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0268-0033(00)00033-4     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Youdas J.W., Garrett T.R., Suman V.J., Boggard C.L., Hallman H.O., Carey J.R. Normal range of motion of the cervical spine: an initial goniometric study. Phys Ther. 72:1992;770-780.
2. Trott P.H., Pearcy M.J., Ruston S.A., Fulton I., Brien C. Three-dimensional analysis of active cervical motion: the effect of age and gender. Clin Biomech. 11:1996;201-206.
3. Dvorak J., Antinnes J.A., Panjabi M., Loustalot D., Bonomo M. Age and gender related normal motion of the cervical spine. Spine. 17:1992;S393-S398.
4. Alaranta H., Hurri H., Heliovaara M., Soukka A., Harju R. Flexibility of the spine: normative values of goniometric and tape measurements. Scand J Rehabil Med. 26:1994;147-154.
5. Feipel V., Rondelet B., Le J.-.P., Pellac M. Normal global motion of the cervical spine: an electrogoniometric study. Clin Biomech. 14:1999;462-470.
6. Kuhlman K.A. Cervical range of motion in the elderly. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 74:1993;1071-1079.
7. Youdas J.W., Carey J.R., Garrett T.R. Reliability of measurements of cervical spine range of motion - comparison of three methods. Phys Ther. 71:1991;98-106.
8. Lantz C.A., Chen J., Buch D. Clinical validity and stability of active and passive cervical range of motion with regard to total and unilateral uniplanar motion. Spine. 24:1999;1082-1089.
9. Ålund M., Larsson S.E. Three dimensional analysis of neck motion: a clinical method. Spine. 15:1990;87-91.
10. Schreiber T. Assessment of whiplash-associated disorders using an ultrasound-based 3-D motion analysis system. In: Proceedings of the First World Congress on Whiplash-Associated Disorders, Vancouver, 1999. p. 144.
11. Mayer T., Brady S., Bovasso E., Pope P., Gatchel R.J. Noninvasive measurement of cervical tri-planar motion in normal subjects. Spine. 18:1993;2191-2195.
12. Castro W.H.M., Sautmann A., Schilgen M., Sautmann M. Noninvasive three-dimensional analysis of cervical spine motion in normal subjects in relation to age and sex. Spine. 25:2000;443-449.
13. Gajdosik R.L., Bohannon R.W. Clinical measurements of range of motion: Reviw of goniometry emphasizing reliability and validity. Phys Ther. 67:1987;1867-1872.
14. Keating J.L., Matyas T.A. Unpredictable error in dynamometry measurements: a quantitative analysis of the literature. Isokinet Exer Sci. 7:1998;107-121.
15. Revel M., Andre-Deshays C., Minguet M. Cervicocephalic kinesthetic sensibility in patients with cervical pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 72:1991;288-291.
16. Heikkilä H.V., Wenngren B.-.I. Cervicocephalic kinesthetic sensibility, active range of cervical motion aqnd oculomotor function in patients with whiplash injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 79:1998;1089-1094.
17. Caillliet R. Neck and arm pain, 3rd ed, Philadelphia, FA: Davis, 1982.
18. Marras W.S., Wongsam P.E. Flexibility and velocity of the normal and impaired lumbar spine. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 67:1986;213-217.