Reliability of a smartphone-based goniometer for knee joint goniometry

International Journal of Rehabilitation Research

Volumn 36, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 146-151

  Ferriero, Giorgio ^a   Vercelli, Stefano ^a   Sartorio, Francesco ^a   Muñoz Lasa, Susana ^d   Ilieva, Elena ^e   Brigatti, Elisa ^a   Ruella, Carolina ^b   Foti, Calogero ^c  

^a IRCCS   (Italy)

^b Private Practitioner   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ROME TOR VERGATA   (Italy)

^d UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID   (Spain)

^e MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF PLOVDIV   (Bulgaria)

Author keywords

knee; mHealth; mobile phone; range of motion; reliability; smartphone; tests and measurements; validation

Indexed keywords

CONTROLLED CONDITIONS; DIFFERENT FLEXION ANGLES; INTEGRATED DIGITAL CAMERAS; KNEE; MHEALTH; RANGE OF MOTIONS; REPEATED MEASUREMENTS; VALIDATION;

GONIOMETERS; MOBILE PHONES; PHYSIOLOGICAL MODELS; RELIABILITY; SMARTPHONES;

JOINTS (ANATOMY);

ARTHROMETRY; HUMAN; JOINT CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS; KNEE; MOBILE APPLICATION; MOBILE PHONE; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; VALIDATION STUDY; ARTICLE; METHODOLOGY;

ARTHROMETRY, ARTICULAR; CELL PHONES; HUMANS; KNEE JOINT; MOBILE APPLICATIONS; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; CELLULAR PHONE;

EID: 84877584724     PISSN: 03425282     EISSN: 14735660     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MRR.0b013e32835b8269     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Bennett D, Hanratty B, Thompson N, Beverland D (2009). Measurement of knee joint motion using digital imaging. Int Orthop 33:1627-1631.
2. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986). Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 8476:307-310.
3. Blonna D, Zarkadas PC, Fitzsimmons JS, O'Driscoll SW (2012). Validation of a photography-based goniometry method for measuring joint range of motion. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 21:29-35.
4. Brosseau L, Balmer S, Tousignant M, O'Sullivan JP, Goudreault C, Goudreault M, et al. (2001). Intra-and inter-tester reliability and criterion validity of the parallelogram and universal goniometers for measuring maximum active knee flexion and extension of patients with knee restrictions. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 82:396-402.
5. Cleffken B, van Breukelen G, Brink P, van Mameren H, Olde Damink S (2007). Digital goniometric measurement of knee joint motion. Evaluation of usefulness for research settings and clinical practice. Knee 14:385-389.
6. Colaris J, van der Linden M, Selles R, Coene N, Allema JH, Verhaar J (2010). Pronation and supination after forearm fractures in children: reliability of visual estimation and conventional goniometry measurement. Injury 41:643-646.
7. Dunlevy C, Cooney M, Gormely J (2005). Procedural considerations for photographic-based joint angle measurements. Physiother Res Int 10: 190-200.
8. Ellis B, Bruton A, Goddard JR (1997). Joint angle measurement: a comparative study of the reliability of goniometry and wire tracing for the hand. Clin Rehabil 11:314-320.
9. Ferriero G, Sartorio F, Foti C, Primavera D, Brigatti E, Vercelli S (2011). Reliability of a new application for smartphones (DrGoniometer) for elbow angle measurement. PM R 3:1153-1154.
10. Fish DR,Wingate L (1985). Sources of goniometric error at the elbow. Phys Ther 65:1666-1670.
11. Georgeu GA, Mayfield S, Logan AM (2002). Lateral digital photography with computer-aided goniometry versus standard goniometry for recording finger joint angles. J Hand Surg Br 27:184-186.
12. Goodwin J, Clark C, Deakes J, Burdon D, Lawrence C (1992). Clinical methods of goniometry: a comparative study. Disabil Rehabil 14:10-15.
13. Hambly K, Sibley R, Ockendon M (2012). Level of agreement between a novel smartphone application and a long arm goniometer for the assessment of maximum active knee flexion by an inexperienced tester. Int J Physiother Rehabil 2:1-14.
14. Huang S, Luo C, Ye S, Liu F, Xie B, Wang C, et al. (2012). Motor impairment evaluation for upper limb in stroke patients on the basis of a microsensor. Int J Rehabil Res 35:161-169.
15. Lenssen AF, van Dam EM, Crijns YH, Verhey M, Geesink RJ, van den Brandt PA, de Bie RA (2007). Reproducibility of goniometric measurement of the knee in the in-hospital phase following total knee arthroplasty. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 17:83.
16. Marks R, Karkouti E (1996). Evaluation of the reliability of reflective marker placements. Physiother Res Int 1:50-61.
17. Naylor JM, Ko V, Adie S, Gaskin C,Walker R, Harris IA, Mittal R (2011). Validity and reliability of using photography for measuring knee range of motion: a methodological study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 12:77.
18. Paul JA, Douwes M (1993). Two-dimensional photographic posture recording and description: a validity study. Appl Ergon 24:83-90.
19. Portney LG,Watkins MP (2000). Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Health.
20. Rothstein JM, Miller PJ, Roettger RF (1983). Goniometric reliability in a clinical setting. Elbow and knee measurements. Phys Ther 63:1611-1615.
21. Russell TG, Jull GA,Wootton R (2003). Can the internet be used as a medium to evaluate knee angle? Man Ther 8:242-246.
22. Smith RP, Dias JJ, Ullah A, Bhowal B (2009). Visual and computer software-aided estimates of Dupuytren's contractures: correlation with clinical goniometric measurements. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 91:296-300.
23. Terry M (2010). Medical apps for smartphones. Telemed J E Health 16:17-22.
24. Verhaegen F, Ganseman Y, Arnout N, Vandenneucker H, Bellemans J (2010). Are clinical photographs appropriate to determine the maximal range of motion of the knee? Acta Orthop Belg 76:794-798.
25. Watkins MA, Riddle DL, Lamb RL, PersoniusWJ (1991). Reliability of goniometric measurements and visual estimates of knee range of motion obtained in a clinical setting. Phys Ther 71:90-96.