Validation of a photography-based goniometry method for measuring joint range of motion

Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 29-35

  Blonna, Davide ^a,b   Zarkadas, Peter C ^a,c   Fitzsimmons, James S ^a   O'Driscoll, Shawn W ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TURIN   (Italy)

^c LIONS GATE HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Contracture release; Cost effectiveness research; Diagnostic Study; Evidence based medicine; Level II; Outcomes assessment; Photography; Range of motion

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ELBOW; ELBOW EXTENSION; ELBOW FLEXION; GONIOMETRY; HUMAN; JOINT CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS; MEASUREMENT; PHOTOGRAPHY; PHOTOGRAPHY BASED GONIOMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANGE OF MOTION; RELIABILITY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARTHROMETRY, ARTICULAR; CONTRACTURE; CROSS-OVER STUDIES; ELBOW JOINT; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHOTOGRAPHY; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 83555161700     PISSN: 10582746     EISSN: 15326500     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.06.018     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Armstrong A.D., MacDermid J.C., Chinchalkar S., Stevens R.S., King G.J. Reliability of range-of-motion measurement in the elbow and forearm. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 1998, 7:573-580.
2. Bland J.M., Altman D.G. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 1999, 8:135-160.
3. Bland J.M., Altman D.G. Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading. Lancet 1995, 346:1085-1087.
4. Bland J.M., Altman D.G. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986, 1:307-310.
5. Cleffken B., van Breukelen G., van Mameren H., Brink P., Olde Damink S. Test-retest reproducibility of elbow goniometric measurements in a rigid double-blinded protocol: intervals for distinguishing between measurement error and clinical change. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2007, 16:788-794. 10.1016/j.jse.2007.02.134.
6. Ergina P.L., Cook J.A., Blazeby J.M., Boutron I., Clavien P.A., Reeves B.C., et al. Challenges in evaluating surgical innovation. Lancet 2009, 374:1097-1104. 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61086-2.
7. Fish D.R., Wingate L. Sources of goniometric error at the elbow. Phys Ther 1985, 65:1666-1670.
8. Fjalestad T., Hole M.O., Jorgensen J.J., Stromsoe K., Kristiansen I.S. Health and cost consequences of surgical versus conservative treatment for a comminuted proximal humeral fracture in elderly patients. Injury 2010, 41:599-605. 10.1016/j.injury.2009.10.056.
9. Franklin G.M., Budenholzer B.R. Implementing evidence-based health policy in Washington State. N Engl J Med 2009, 361:1722-1725.
10. Haas M. The reliability of reliability. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1991, 14:199-208.
11. Haas M. Statistical methodology for reliability studies. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1991, 14:119-132.
12. Rothstein J.M., Miller P.J., Roettger R.F. Goniometric reliability in a clinical setting. Elbow and knee measurements. Phys Ther 1983, 63:1611-1615.
13. Shortell S.M., Rundall T.G., Hsu J. Improving patient care by linking evidence-based medicine and evidence-based management. JAMA 2007, 298:673-676. 10.1001/jama.298.6.673.
14. Shrout P.E., Fleiss J.L. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979, 86:420-428.