Concurrent Validity of 2D and Inertial Goniometer Motion Assessment

in International Journal of Athletic Therapy and Training
View More View Less
  • 1 University of Federal Armed Forces Munich
  • 2 Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
  • 3 Hopital de la Tour
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD  $24.95

Student 1 year subscription

USD  $74.00

1 year subscription

USD  $99.00

Student 2 year subscription

USD  $141.00

2 year subscription

USD  $188.00

Context: The validity and reliability of manual goniometry is highly dependent on the examiner’s expertise. Technological advances can overcome these problems to some extent. Inertial goniometry, for instance, could bridge the gap between 2D and manual goniometry, but its validity remains to be studied. Participants: 40 healthy individuals (mean ± SD: 31 men, age = 23.9 ± 4.1 years, 184 ± 6 cm, 80.7 ± 10.0 kg; 9 women, age = 23.6 ± 3.6 years, 170 ± 4 cm, 60.6 ± 5.1 kg). Measurements: 2D and inertial goniometry by mobee med were used to measure active and passive single straight-leg raise mobility performance. Intracorrelation coefficients (ICCs) and typical error of the estimate (TEE) inform the reliability and quality of the measurement by the rater. Results: The relationship of the inertial goniometry for active and passive mobility of the single straight-leg raise was practically perfect (r = .95–.98). Based on the Bland-Altman plots, the means of the difference between the 2D and inertial based goniometry were small (2–3°). Conclusion: Due to its high concurrent validity, ease of use, and efficiency with regard to time and personnel requirements, this inertial goniometer device is an effective and efficient approach to measuring range of motion. However, additional validity and reliability studies should investigate joints with more degrees of freedom.

K. Kraus is a research associate with the Department of Sports Science, University of Federal Armed Forces Munich, Neubiberg, Germany. E. Kraus (graduated pharmacist) is a research associate with the Faculty of Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Univerisität München, Munchen, Germany. Gojanovic and Fourchet are with the Physiotherapy Department, Hopital de la Tour, Meyrin, Switzerland.

Kraus (k.kraus@proathlete.de) is corresponding author.
  • 1.

    Askling C, Saartok T, Thorstensson A. Type of acute hamstring strain affects flexibility, strength, and time to return to pre-injury level. Br J Sports Med. 2006;40(1):4044. PubMed ID:16371489 doi:10.1136/bjsm.2005.018879

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Malliaropoulos N, Mendiguchia J, Pehlivanidis H, et al. Hamstring exercises for track and field athletes: injury and exercise biomechanics, and possible implications for exercise selection and primary prevention. Br J Sports Med. 2012;46(12):846851. PubMed ID:22685125 doi:10.1136/bjsports-2011-090474

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Marsico P, Tal-Akabi A, van Hedel HJA. The relevance of nerve mobility on function and activity in children with Cerebral Palsy. BMC Neurol. 2016;16(1):194. PubMed ID:27717320 doi:10.1186/s12883-016-0715-z

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Lea RD, Gerhardt JJ. Range-of-motion measurements. Journal of Bone Joint Surgery Am. 1995;77(5):784798. doi:10.2106/00004623-199505000-00017

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    McCall A, Carling C, Davison M, et al. Injury risk factors, screening tests and preventative strategies: a systematic review of the evidence that underpins the perceptions and practices of 44 football (soccer) teams from various premier leagues. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(9):583589. PubMed ID:25576530 doi:10.1136/bjsports-2014-094104

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    de la Motte SJ, Gribbin TC, Lisman P, Beutler AI, Deuster P. The interrelationship of common clinical movement screens: establishing population-specific norms in a large cohort of military applicants. J Athl Train. 2016;51(11):897904. PubMed ID:27831746 doi:10.4085/1062-6050-51.9.11

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Whiteside D, Deneweth JM, Pohorence MA, et al. Grading the functional movement screen: a comparison of manual (real-time) and objective methods. J Strength Cond Res. 2016;30(4):924933. PubMed ID:25162646 doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000000654

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Lenssen AF, van Dam EM, Crijns Y, Verhey M. Reproducibility of goniometric measurement of the knee in the in-hospital phase following total knee arthroplasty. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2007;8:83. PubMed ID:17705860 doi:10.1186/1471-2474-8-83

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Blonna D, Zarkadas PC, Fitzsimmons JS, O´Driscoll SW. Accuracy and inter-observer reliability of visual estimation compared to clinical goniometry of the elbow. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012;20(7):13781385. PubMed ID:22089371 doi:10.1007/s00167-011-1720-9

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Naylor JM, Ko V, Adie S, et al. Validity and reliability of using photography for measuring knee range of motion: a methodological study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011;12:77. doi:10.1186/1471-2474-12-77

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Blonna D, Zarkadas PC, Fitzsimmons JS, O´Driscoll SW. Validation of a photography-based goniometry method for measuring joint range of motion. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(1):2935. PubMed ID:21983191 doi:10.1016/j.jse.2011.06.018

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Zumbo BD. Validity: foundational issues and statistical methodology. In: Rao CR, Suhasini SL, eds. Handbook of Statistics: Psychometrics. Vol. 26. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland/Elsevier; 2014:4579.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Messick S. Validity of psychological assessment: validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. Am Psychol. 1995;50(9):741749. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Shin SH, Du Ro H, Lee OS, Oh JH, Kim SH. Within-day reliability of shoulder range of motion measurement with a smartphone. Man Ther. 2012;17(4):298304. PubMed ID:22421186 doi:10.1016/j.math.2012.02.010

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Wellmon RH, Gulick DT, Paterson ML, Gulick CN. Validity and reliability of 2 goniometric mobile apps: device, application, and examiner factors. J Sport Rehabil. 2016;25(4):371379. PubMed ID:27632853 doi:10.1123/jsr.2015-0041

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Arnason A, Sigurdsson SB, Gudmundsson A, Holme I, Engebretsen L, Bahr R. Risk factors for injuries in football. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32(suppl 1):5S16S. doi:10.1177/0363546503258912

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Balsalobre-Fernández C, Tejero-González CM, del Campo-Vecino J, Bavaresco N. The concurrent validity and reliability of a low-cost, high-speed camera-based method for measuring the flight time of vertical jumps. J Strength Cond Res. 2014;28(2):528533. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e318299a52e

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Cook G, Burton L, Hoogenboom BJ, Voight M. Functional movement screening: the use of fundamental movements as an assessment of function-part 2. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2014;9(4):549563. PubMed ID:25133083

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Paul JW, Douwes M. Two-dimensional photographic posture recording and description: a validity study. Appl Ergon. 1993;24:8390. PubMed ID:15676902 doi:10.1016/0003-6870(93)90079-O

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Hoaglin DC, Iglewicz B, Tukey JW. Performance of some resistant rules for outlier labeling. J Am Stat Assoc. 1986;81(396):991999. doi:10.1080/01621459.1986.10478363

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Hoaglin DC, Iglewicz B. Fine-tuning some resistant rules for outlier labeling. J Am Stat Assoc. 1987;82(400):11471149. doi:10.1080/01621459.1987.10478551

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis; 2013. http://gbv.eblib.com/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=1192162.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Posten HO. Robustness of the two-sample t-test. In: Rasch D, Tiku ML, eds. Robustness of Statistical Methods and Nonparametric Statistics: Theory and Decision Library, Series B: Mathematical and Statistical Methods. Vol. 1. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer Netherlands; 1984:9299.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Hopkins WG. Reliability from consecutive pairs of trials (Excel spreadsheet). http://www.sportsci.org. Accessed June, 2014.

  • 25.

    Kraus K, Schütz E, Doyscher R. Construct validation of the FMS: relationship between a jump-landing task and FMS items. J Strength Cond Res. 2017;33(7):1. doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000002121

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 95 95 11
Full Text Views 133 133 11
PDF Downloads 74 74 3