Reliability and validity of non-radiographic methods of thoracic kyphosis measurement: A systematic review |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Clinical Therapies, Faculty of Education and Health Sciences, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland;2. Musculoskeletal Services, Health at the Stowe, Central London Community Healthcare, NHS Trust, 260 Harrow Road, London W2 5ES, UK;3. Department of Allied Health Professions and Midwifery, School of Health and Social Work, Wright Building, College Lane Campus, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL10 9AB, Hertfordshire, UK;1. Division of Physical Therapy, Walsh University, 2020 East Maple Street, North Canton, OH 44720, USA;2. Division of Physical Therapy, Youngstown State University, Youngstown, OH, USA;3. The Therapy Institute, Haslett, MI, USA;4. Maitland Australian Physiotherapy Seminars, Cutchogue, NY, USA;5. Pain Relief and Physical Therapy, Havertown, PA, USA;1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Dr, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA;2. Orthopedic Research Department, Children''s Specialist of San Diego, 3030 Childrens Way, Suite 410, San Diego, CA 92123-4228, USA;3. Division of Orthopedic Surgery, Rady Children''s Hospital, 3030 Children''s Way, Suite 410, San Diego, CA 92123, USA;1. Department of Kinesiology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada;2. Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA |
| |
| Abstract: | BackgroundA wide array of instruments are available for non-invasive thoracic kyphosis measurement. Guidelines for selecting outcome measures for use in clinical and research practice recommend that properties such as validity and reliability are considered. This systematic review reports on the reliability and validity of non-invasive methods for measuring thoracic kyphosis.MethodsA systematic search of 11 electronic databases located studies assessing reliability and/or validity of non-invasive thoracic kyphosis measurement techniques. Two independent reviewers used a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of retrieved studies. Data was extracted by the primary reviewer. The results were synthesized qualitatively using a level of evidence approach.Results27 studies satisfied the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. The reliability, validity and both reliability and validity were investigated by sixteen, two and nine studies respectively. 17/27 studies were deemed to be of high quality. In total, 15 methods of thoracic kyphosis were evaluated in retrieved studies. All investigated methods showed high (ICC ≥ .7) to very high (ICC ≥ .9) levels of reliability. The validity of the methods ranged from low to very high.ConclusionThe strongest levels of evidence for reliability exists in support of the Debrunner kyphometer, Spinal Mouse and Flexicurve index, and for validity supports the arcometer and Flexicurve index. Further reliability and validity studies are required to strengthen the level of evidence for the remaining methods of measurement. This should be addressed by future research. |
| |
| Keywords: | Reliability Validity Thoracic kyphosis Measurement |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
