Objective assessment, repeatability, and agreement of shoulder ROM with a 3D gyroscope

BackgroundAssessment of shoulder mobility is essential for diagnosis and clinical follow-up of shoulder diseases. Only a few highly sophisticated instruments for objective measurements of shoulder mobility are available. The recently introduced DynaPort MiniMod TriGyro ShoulderTest-System (DP) was validated earlier in laboratory trials. We aimed to assess the precision (repeatability) and agreement of this instrument in human subjects, as compared to the conventional goniometer.MethodsThe DP is a small, light-weight, three-dimensional gyroscope that can be fixed on the distal upper arm, recording shoulder abduction, flexion, and rotation. Twenty-one subjects (42 shoulders) were included for analysis. Two subsequent assessments of the same subject with a 30-minute delay in testing of each shoulder were performed with the DP in two directions (flexion and abduction), and simultaneously correlated with the measurements of a conventional goniometer. All assessments were performed by one observer. Repeatability for each method was determined and compared as the statistical variance between two repeated measurements. Agreement was illustrated by Bland-Altman-Plots with 95% limits of agreement. Statistical analysis was performed with a linear mixed regression model. Variance for repeated measurements by the same method was also estimated and compared with the likelihood-ratio test.ResultsEvaluation of abduction showed significantly better repeatability for the DP compared to the conventional goniometer (error variance: DP = 0.89, goniometer = 8.58, p = 0.025). No significant differences were found for flexion (DP = 1.52, goniometer = 5.94, p = 0.09). Agreement assessment was performed for flexion for mean differences of 0.27° with 95% limit of agreement ranging from −7.97° to 8.51°. For abduction, the mean differences were 1.19° with a 95% limit of agreement ranging from −9.07° to 11.46°.ConclusionIn summary, DP demonstrated a high precision even higher than the conventional goniometer. Agreement between both methods is acceptable, with possible deviations of up to greater than 10°. Therefore, static measurements with DP are more precise than conventional goniometer measurements. These results are promising for routine clinical use of the DP.

[1]  G R Johnson,et al.  The measurement of three dimensional scapulohumeral kinematics--a study of reliability. , 1999, Clinical biomechanics.

[2]  Frank M. Go,et al.  The Asian Perspective: Which International Conference Destinations in Asia Are the Most Competitive? , 1999 .

[3]  G. Murrell,et al.  Reliability of five methods for assessing shoulder range of motion. , 2001, The Australian journal of physiotherapy.

[4]  B. Owens.  Shoulder instability in athletes. , 2012, Orthopedics.

[5]  Michael T. Gross,et al.  Intramachine and Intermachine Reliability of the Biodex and Cybex® II for Knee Flexion and Extension Peak Torque and Angular Work , 1991 .

[6]  B. Carstensen,et al.  Statistical Models for Assessing Agreement in Method Comparison Studies with Replicate Measurements , 2008, The international journal of biostatistics.

[7]  Lex M Bouter,et al.  Interobserver reproducibility of the visual estimation of range of motion of the shoulder. , 2005, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[8]  J. Gallagher,et al.  Reliability of Testing the Knee Extensors and Flexors in Healthy Adult Women Using a Cybex II Isokinetic Dynamometer. , 1991, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[9]  Susanne Fuchs-Winkelmann,et al.  Objective Assessment of shoulder mobility with a new 3D gyroscope - a validation study , 2011, BMC musculoskeletal disorders.

[10]  S. Fuchs-Winkelmann,et al.  Co-occurrence of outlet impingement syndrome of the shoulder and restricted range of motion in the thoracic spine - a prospective study with ultrasound-based motion analysis , 2010, BMC musculoskeletal disorders.

[11]  R. Donatelli,et al.  Isokinetic evaluation of shoulder rotational strength between the plane of scapula and the frontal plane , 1990, The American journal of sports medicine.

[12]  M. Mullaney,et al.  Reliability of shoulder range of motion comparing a goniometer to a digital level , 2010, Physiotherapy theory and practice.

[13]  P. Raiss,et al.  [Range of motion of shoulder and elbow in activities of daily life in 3D motion analysis]. , 2007, Zeitschrift fur Orthopadie und Unfallchirurgie.

[14]  C. Wiktorin,et al.  A triaxial accelerometer for measuring arm movements. , 2002, Applied ergonomics.

[15]  N. Maffulli,et al.  Shoulder Instability in Athletes: The Asian Perspective , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[16]  C. Terwee,et al.  Inter-observer reproducibility of measurements of range of motion in patients with shoulder pain using a digital inclinometer , 2004, BMC musculoskeletal disorders.

[17]  Willem Van Mechelen,et al.  Reproducibility of a triaxial seismic accelerometer (DynaPort). , 2009, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[18]  M. Palmer,et al.  Test-retest reliability of eccentric peak torque values for shoulder medial and lateral rotation using the Biodex isokinetic dynamometer. , 1994, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[19]  E. Taub,et al.  Objective measurement of functional upper-extremity movement using accelerometer recordings transformed with a threshold filter. , 2000, Stroke.