Intertester reliability and validity of motion assessments during lumbar spine accessory motion testing

Physical Therapy

Volumn 88, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 43-49

  Landel, Rob ^a   Kulig, Kornelia ^a   Fredericson, Michael ^b   Li, Bernard ^a   Powers, Christopher M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; LOW BACK PAIN; LUMBAR SPINE; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; RELIABILITY; SPINE MOBILITY; VALIDITY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; LOW BACK PAIN; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MANIPULATION, SPINAL; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 37549007100     PISSN: 00319023     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2522/ptj.20060179     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Fritz JM, Piva SR, Childs JD. Accuracy of the clinical examination to predict radiographic instability of the lumbar spine. Eur Spine J 2005;14:743-750.
2. Fritz JM, Whitman JM, Childs JD. Lumbar spine segmental mobility assessment: an examination of validity for determining intervention strategies in patients with low back pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:1745-1752.
3. Childs JD, Fritz JM, Flynn TW, et al. A clinical prediction rule to identify patients with low back pain most likely to benefit from spinal manipulation: a validation studv. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141: 920:928.
4. Fritz JM, Whitman JM, Flynn TW, et al. Factors related to the inability of individuals with low back pain to improve with a spinal manipulation. Phys Ther. 2004;84: 173-190.
5. Grieve G. Mobilisation of the Spine: A Primary Handbook of Clinical Method. Edinburgh, United Kingdom: Churchill Livingstone; 1991:164.
6. Maitland GD, Hengeveld E, Banks K, English K. Vertebral Manipulation. 6th ed. Oxford, United Kingdom: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2001:152.
7. Binkley J, Stratford PW, Gill C. Interrater reliability of lumbar accessory motion mobility testing. Phys Ther. 1995;75: 786-792; discussion 793-795.
8. Maher C, Adams R. Reliability of pain and stiffness assessments in clinical manual lumbar spine examination. Phys Ther. 1994;74:801-809; discussion 809-811.
9. Kulig K, Landel R, Powers CM. Assessment of lumbar spine kinematics using dynamic MRI: a proposed mechanism of sagittal plane motion induced by manual posterior-to-anterior mobilization. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004;34:57-64.
10. Beneck GJ, Kulig K, Landel RF, Powers CM. The relationship between lumbar segmental motion and pain response produced by a posterior-to-anterior force in persons with nonspecific low back pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2005;35: 203-209.
11. Powers CM, Kulig K, Harrison J, Bergman G. Segmental mobility of the lumbar spine during a posterior to anterior mobilization: assessment using dynamic MRI. Clin Biomech. 2003;18:80-83.
12. Maitland GD, Hengeveld E, Banks K, English K. Vertebral Manipulation. 6th ed. Oxford, United Kingdom: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2001.
13. Fleiss JL. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Wiley-Interscience; 1981.
14. Lee YW, McGregor AH, Bull AMJ, Wragg P. Dynamic response of the cervical spine to posteroanterior mobilisation. Clin Biomech. 2004;20:228-231.
15. Lee YW, Tsung BY, Tong P, Evans J. Bending stiffness of the lumbar spine subjected to posteroanterior manipulative force. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2005;42:167-174.
16. Petty NJ, Maher C, Latimer J, Lee M. Manual examination of accessory movements: seeking R1. Man Ther. 2002;7:39-43.
17. Maher CG, Latimer J, Adams R. An investigation of the reliability and validity of posteroanterior spinal stiffness judgments made using a reference-based protocol. Phys Ther. 1998;78:829-837.
18. Bjornsdottir SV, Kumar S. Posteroanterior spinal mobilization: state of the art review and discussion. Disabil Rehabil. 1997; 19:39-46.
19. Latimer J, Lee M, Adams RD. The effects of high and low loading forces on measured values of lumbar stiffness. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1998;21:157-163.
20. Maher CG, Simmonds M, Adams R. Therapists' conceptualization and characterization of the clinical concept of spinal stiffness. Phys Ther. 1998;78:289-300.
21. Maher CG, Adams R. Is the clinical concept of spinal stiffness multidimensional? Phys Ther. 1995;75:854-860; discussion 861-864.
22. Lee R, Evans J. An in vivo study of the intervertebral movements produced by posteroanterior mobilization. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1997;12:400-408.
23. McGregor AH, Wragg P, Gedroyc WM. Can interventional MRI provide an insight into the mechanics of a posterior-anterior mobilisation? Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2001;16:926-929.
24. Simmonds MJ, Kumar S, Lechelt E. Use of a spinal model to quantify the forces and motion that occur during therapists' tests of spinal motion. Phys Ther. 1995;75: 212-222.
25. Mootz RD, Keating JC Jr, Kontz HP, et al. Intra- and interobserver reliability of passive motion palpation of the lumbar spine. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1989;12: 440-445.
26. Riddle DL. Measurement of accessory motion: critical issues and related concepts. Phys Ther. 1992;72:865-874.
27. Smedmark V, Wallin M, Arvidsson I. Interexaminer reliability in assessing passive intervertebral motion of the cervical spine. Man Ther. 2000;5:97-101.
28. Chiradejnant A, Maher CG, Latimer J. Objective manual assessment of lumbar posteroanterior stiffness is now possible. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2003;26: 34-39.
29. Panzer DM. The reliability of lumbar motion palpation. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1992;15:518-524.