Reliability and Normative Database of the Zebris Cervical Range-of-Motion System in Healthy Controls With Preliminary Validation in a Group of Patients With Neck Pain

Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics

Volumn 30, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 450-455

  Cagnie, Barbara ^a   Cools, Ann ^a   De Loose, Veerle ^b   Cambier, Dirk ^a   Danneels, Lieven ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^b QUEEN ASTRID MILITARY HOSPITAL   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Articular; Neck Pain; Range of Motion; Reproducibility of Results; Whiplash Injuries

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CERVICAL SPINE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; DATA BASE; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IDIOPATHIC DISEASE; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; INTRARATER RELIABILITY; MALE; MOTION ANALYSIS SYSTEM; NECK PAIN; NORMAL HUMAN; NORMAL VALUE; RANGE OF MOTION; RELIABILITY; REPRODUCIBILITY; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; ULTRASOUND; VALIDATION PROCESS; VOLUNTEER; WHIPLASH INJURY;

ADULT; CERVICAL VERTEBRAE; CHRONIC DISEASE; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NECK PAIN; OBSERVER VARIATION; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; WHIPLASH INJURIES;

EID: 34547805247     PISSN: 01614754     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.05.003     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Malmstrom E., Karlberg M., Meande A., and Magnusson M. Zebris versus Myrin: a comparative study between a three-dimensional ultrasound movement analysis and an inclinometer/compass method. Spine 28 (2003) 433-444
2. Mannion A., Klein G., Dvorak J., and Lanz C. Range of global motion of the cervical spine: intraindividual reliability and the influence of measurement device. Eur Spine J 9 (2000) 379-385
3. Strimpakos N., Sakellari V., Gioftsos G., et al. Cervical spine ROM measurements: optimizing the testing protocol by using a 3D ultrasound-based motion analysis system. Cephalalgia 25 (2005) 1133-1145
4. Dvir Z., Gal-Eshel N., Shamier B., Prushansky T., Pevzener E., and Peretz C. Cervical motion in patients with chronic disorders of the cervical spine: a reproducibility study. Spine 31 (2006) 394-399
5. Dvir Z., and Prushansky T. Reproducibility and instrument validity of a new ultrasonography based system for measuring cervical spine kinematics. Clin Biomech 15 (2000) 658-664
6. Antonaci F., Bulgheroni M., Ghirmai S., et al. 3D kinematic analysis and clinical evaluation of neck movements in patients with whiplash injury. Cephalalgia 22 (2002) 533-542
7. Chen J., Solinger A., Poncet J., and Lantz C. Meta-analysis of normative cervical motion. Spine 24 (1999) 1571-1578
8. Jordan K. Assessment of published reliability studies for cervical spine range of motion measurement tools. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 23 (2000) 180-195
9. Dvir Z., Werner V., and Peretz C. The effect of measurement protocol on active cervical motion in healthy subjects. Physiother Res Int 7 (2002) 136-145
10. Castro W., Sautmann A., Schilgen M., and Sautmann M. Non-invasive three-dimensional analysis of cervical spine motion in normal subjects in relation to age and sex. Spine 25 (2000) 443-449
11. Hoving J., Pool J., van Mameren H., Devillé W., Assendelft W., de Vet H., et al. Reproducibility of cervical range of motion in patients with neck pain. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 6 (2005) 59
12. Nilsson N. Measuring passive cervical motion: a study of reliability. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 18 (1995) 293-297
13. Jordan K., Dziedzic K., Jones W., Ong B., and Dawes P. The reliability of the three-dimensional FASTRAK measurement system in measuring cervical spine and shoulder range of motion in healthy subjects. Rheumatology 39 (2000) 382-388
14. Petersen C., Johnson R., and Schuit D. Reliability of cervical range of motion using the OSI CA 6000 spine motion analyser on asymptomatic and symptomatic subjects. Man Ther 5 (2000) 82-88
15. Christensen H., and Nilsson N. The reliability of measuring active and passive cervical range of motion. An observer-blinded and randomized repeated-measures design. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 21 (1998) 341-347
16. Feipel V., Rondelet B., Le Pallec J., and Rooze M. Normal global motion of the cervical spine: an electrogoniometric study. Clin Biomech 14 (1999) 462-470
17. Sforza C., Grassi G., Fragnito N., Turci M., and Ferrario V. Three-dimensional analysis of active head and cervical spine range of motion: effect of age in healthy male subjects. Clin Biomech 17 (2002) 611-614
18. Wang S., Teng C., and Lin K. Measurement of cervical range of motion pattern during cyclic neck movement by an ultrasound-based motion system. Man Ther 10 (2005) 68-72
19. Wolfenberger V., Bui W., and Batenchuk G. A comparison of methods of evaluating cervical range of motion. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 25 (2002) 154-160
20. Mayer T., Brady S., Bovasso E., Pope P., and Gatchel R. Noninvasive measurement of cervical tri-planar motion in normal subjects. Spine 18 (1993) 2191-2195
21. Dall'Alba P., Sterling M., Treleaven J., Edwards S., and Jull G. Cervical range of motion discriminate between asymptomatic persons and those with whiplash. Spine 26 (2001) 2090-2094
22. Hagen K., Harms-Ringdahl K., Enger N., Hedenstad R., and Morten H. Relationship between subjective neck disorders and cervical spine mobility and motion-related pain in male machine operators. Spine 22 (1997) 1501-1507
23. Lee H., Nicholson L., and Adams R. Cervical range of motion associations with subclinical neck pain. Spine 29 (2003) 33-40
24. Ylinen J., Takala E., Kautiainen H., et al. Association of neck pain, disability and neck pain during maximal effort with neck muscle strength and range of movement in women with chronic non-specific neck pain. Eur J Pain 8 (2004) 473-478