Clinically acceptable agreement between the ViMove wireless motion sensor system and the Vicon motion capture system when measuring lumbar region inclination motion in the sagittal and coronal planes

BackgroundWireless, wearable, inertial motion sensor technology introduces new possibilities for monitoring spinal motion and pain in people during their daily activities of work, rest and play. There are many types of these wireless devices currently available but the precision in measurement and the magnitude of measurement error from such devices is often unknown. This study investigated the concurrent validity of one inertial motion sensor system (ViMove) for its ability to measure lumbar inclination motion, compared with the Vicon motion capture system.MethodsTo mimic the variability of movement patterns in a clinical population, a sample of 34 people were included – 18 with low back pain and 16 without low back pain. ViMove sensors were attached to each participant’s skin at spinal levels T12 and S2, and Vicon surface markers were attached to the ViMove sensors. Three repetitions of end-range flexion inclination, extension inclination and lateral flexion inclination to both sides while standing were measured by both systems concurrently with short rest periods in between. Measurement agreement through the whole movement range was analysed using a multilevel mixed-effects regression model to calculate the root mean squared errors and the limits of agreement were calculated using the Bland Altman method.ResultsWe calculated root mean squared errors (standard deviation) of 1.82° (±1.00°) in flexion inclination, 0.71° (±0.34°) in extension inclination, 0.77° (±0.24°) in right lateral flexion inclination and 0.98° (±0.69°) in left lateral flexion inclination. 95% limits of agreement ranged between -3.86° and 4.69° in flexion inclination, -2.15° and 1.91° in extension inclination, -2.37° and 2.05° in right lateral flexion inclination and -3.11° and 2.96° in left lateral flexion inclination.ConclusionsWe found a clinically acceptable level of agreement between these two methods for measuring standing lumbar inclination motion in these two cardinal movement planes. Further research should investigate the ViMove system’s ability to measure lumbar motion in more complex 3D functional movements and to measure changes of movement patterns related to treatment effects.

[1]  S. Verschueren,et al.  Validation of a novel spinal posture monitor: comparison with digital videofluoroscopy , 2012, European Spine Journal.

[2]  I. Cosic,et al.  A reliability study of the new Back Strain Monitor based on clinical trials , 2008, 2008 30th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[3]  L. Murphy,et al.  Reliability of Spinal Palpation for Diagnosis of Back and Neck Pain: A Systematic Review of the Literature , 2004, Spine.

[4]  C. Leboeuf‐Yde,et al.  Are chiropractic tests for the lumbo-pelvic spine reliable and valid? A systematic critical literature review. , 2000, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[5]  Stephan Milosavljevic,et al.  Validity and reliability of the Spineangel® lumbo-pelvic postural monitor , 2013, Ergonomics.

[6]  D. Altman,et al.  Agreement Between Methods of Measurement with Multiple Observations Per Individual , 2007, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[7]  Kambiz Saber-Sheikh,et al.  Measurement of lumbar spine range of movement and coupled motion using inertial sensors - a protocol validity study. , 2013, Manual therapy.

[8]  Leonard O'Sullivan,et al.  Towards monitoring lumbo-pelvic posture in real-life situations: concurrent validity of a novel posture monitor and a traditional laboratory-based motion analysis system. , 2012, Manual therapy.

[9]  A. Beckett,et al.  AKUFO AND IBARAPA. , 1965, Lancet.

[10]  P. Disler,et al.  Reliability of the American Medical Association guides' model for measuring spinal range of motion. Its implication for whole-person impairment rating. , 1999, Spine.

[11]  Michael T. Haneline,et al.  Spinal motion palpation: a comparison of studies that assessed intersegmental end feel vs excursion. , 2008, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[12]  C. Maher,et al.  A modified Delphi approach to standardize low back pain recurrence terminology , 2011, European Spine Journal.

[13]  Wai-Yin Wong,et al.  Trunk posture monitoring with inertial sensors , 2008, European Spine Journal.

[14]  Edgar Charry,et al.  Design and validation of an ambulatory inertial system for 3-D measurements of low back movements , 2011, 2011 Seventh International Conference on Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information Processing.

[15]  Claudio Belvedere,et al.  Quantitative comparison of current models for trunk motion in human movement analysis. , 2009, Clinical biomechanics.

[16]  Kevin Huang,et al.  Development of a real-time three-dimensional spinal motion measurement system for clinical practice , 2006, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[17]  Morey J Kolber,et al.  The reliability and concurrent validity of measurements used to quantify lumbar spine mobility: an analysis of an iphone® application and gravity based inclinometry. , 2013, International journal of sports physical therapy.

[18]  P. Shekelle,et al.  A Consensus Approach Toward the Standardization of Back Pain Definitions for Use in Prevalence Studies , 2008, Spine.

[19]  Rachelle Buchbinder,et al.  The global burden of low back pain: estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study , 2014, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[20]  Stephan Milosavljevic,et al.  The Spineangel: Examining the validity and reliability of a novel clinical device for monitoring trunk motion. , 2010, Manual therapy.

[21]  M. Jensen,et al.  Comparative reliability and validity of chronic pain intensity measures , 1999, PAIN.

[22]  A. Jensen,et al.  [Criteria validation of the Roland Morris questionnaire. A Danish translation of the international scale for the assessment of functional level in patients with low back pain and sciatica]. , 2003, Ugeskrift for laeger.

[23]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[24]  Jennifer L Keating,et al.  Comparing lumbo-pelvic kinematics in people with and without back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2014, BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.

[25]  Peter Kent,et al.  How consistent are lordosis, range of movement and lumbo-pelvic rhythm in people with and without back pain? , 2016, BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.

[26]  J. Richards,et al.  The measurement of human motion: A comparison of commercially available systems , 1999 .