Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Using the cervical range of motion (CROM) device to assess head repositioning accuracy in individuals with cervical radiculopathy in comparison to neck- healthy individuals
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3464-1538
Centre Hospital University of Grenoble, France.
CNRS UJF UPMF EPHE, France.
Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden.
Show others and affiliations
2013 (English)In: Manual Therapy, ISSN 1356-689X, E-ISSN 1532-2769, Vol. 18, no 5, 403-409 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This study had two purposes: to compare head repositioning accuracy (HRA) using the cervical range of motion (CROM) device between individuals with cervical radiculopathy caused by disc disease (CDD; n = 71) and neck- healthy individuals (n = 173); and to evaluate the test–retest reliability of the CROM device in individuals with CDD, and criterion validity between the CROM device and a laser in neck-healthy individuals, with quantification of measurement errors. Parameters of reliability and validity were expressed with intra- class- correlation coefficients (ICCs), and measurement errors with standard error of measurement (SEM) and Bland Altman limits of agreement. HRA (Mdn, IQR) differed significantly between individuals with CDD and neck- healthy individuals after rotation right 2.7° (6.0), 1.7° (2.7); and rotation left 2.7° (3.3), 1.3° (2.7) (p < = 0.021); 31% of individuals with CDD were classified as having impairment in HRA. The test–retest reliability of the CROM device in individuals with CDD showed ICCs of 0.79- 0.85, and SEMs of 1.4°- 2°. The criterion validity between the CROM device and the laser in neck-healthy individuals showed ICCs of 0.43- 0.91 and SEMs of 0.8°- 1.3°. The results support the use of the CROM device for quantifying HRA impairment in individuals with CDD in clinical practice; however, criterion validity between the CROM device and a laser in neck-healthy individuals was questionable. HRA impairment in individuals with CDD may be important to consider during rehabilitation and evaluated with the criterion established with the CROM device in neck-healthy individuals.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier , 2013. Vol. 18, no 5, 403-409 p.
Keyword [en]
Neck pain, Radiculopathy, Head repositioning accuracy, Measurement
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-98660DOI: 10.1016/j.math.2013.02.004ISI: 000324341300009OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-98660DiVA: diva2:655274
Note

Funding Agencies|Swedish Research Council||Swedish Society of Medicine||Medical Research Council of Southeast Sweden||

Available from: 2013-10-10 Created: 2013-10-10 Last updated: 2017-12-06
In thesis
1. Neck disability in patients with cervical radiculopathy and evaluation of structured postoperative physiotherapy
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Neck disability in patients with cervical radiculopathy and evaluation of structured postoperative physiotherapy
2015 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Non-surgical and surgical approaches to treatment are used in patients with cervical radiculopathy (CR) due to disc disease. Overall, good effects of surgery have been reported on arm pain and neurological symptoms. However, the effects on neck functioning are more uncertain. Studies have shown persistent activity limitations; participation restrictions; and impairments in neck-related body functions after surgery. Structured physiotherapy combining neck-specific exercises with a behavioural approach has been suggested as treatment before as well as after surgery to improve clinical outcomes in patients with CR. Randomized clinical trials of postoperative physiotherapy to inform evidence-based clinical guidelines for the treatment of patients with CR are lacking.

The overall aim of the thesis was to investigate the additional benefit of structured postoperative physiotherapy combining neck-specific exercises with a behavioural approach compared to standard postoperative approach in patients with CR. A further aim was to evaluate the  contribution of different aspects of neck-related body functions and mental functions on preoperative neck disability in these patients.

A total of 202 patients with CR who were scheduled for surgery were recruited, and randomized preoperatively to either structured postoperative physiotherapy, or standard postoperative approach. Standard postoperative approach was in accordance with Swedish postoperative care, and may have included pragmatic physiotherapy after surgery when needed. Patients were evaluated with a set of questionnaires and clinical examinations before surgery and at 3 and 6 months after surgery. Outcomes included patient-reported measures of pain, neck functioning, global outcome, clinical evaluation of neckrelated body functions, self-efficacy and coping strategies, as well as expectation fulfilment and enablement. Differences between treatment groups were investigated in complete case and per-protocol approaches (Paper III & IV). A sub-sample of patients with CR who were scheduled for surgery were also compared with neck-healthy individuals for assessment of head repositioning accuracy with a cervical range of motion device (Paper I). In patients with CR who were scheduled for surgery, associations between preoperative measures of neck-related body functions, mental functions, and other contextual factors with patientreported neck disability were studied (Paper II).

With the exception of greater expectation fulfilment in patients who received structured postoperative physiotherapy (p = 0.01), there were no differences between the treatment groups in outcomes at 6 months after surgery. There were no differences reported for changes in  outcomes from before surgery to 6 months after surgery between the groups, but all outcomes significantly improved from baseline in both groups (p<0.001) (Paper III & IV). However, global outcome and frequency of neck pain improved during the postoperative period only in patients who received structured postoperative physiotherapy (p< 0.01) (Paper III). Six months after surgery, patients with at least 50% attendance to treatment sessions in the structured postoperative physiotherapy group reported less neck pain frequency (p = 0.05), and greater expectation fulfilment (p = 0.001), and enablement (p = 0.04) than those who received standard postoperative approach. These patients also had larger improvements in neck functioning, arm pain and catastrophizing during the rehabilitation period from 3 to 6 months after surgery (p< 0.03). Sixty-one percent of the patients who received standard postoperative approach reported additional use ofpostoperative physiotherapy. These patients had a worse surgical outcome compared with patients who reported no additional use of postoperative physiotherapy. In patients with CR who were scheduled for surgery, larger errors in head repositioning accuracy were found compared to neck-healthy individuals (Paper I). Preoperative measures of neck-related body functions, mental functions and other contextual factors explained 73% of the variance in Neck Disability Index scores in patients with CR who were scheduled for surgery (Paper II).

The results may suggest a benefit from combining surgery with structured postoperative physiotherapy in patients with CR. Moreover, the results confirm that neck-specific exercises are tolerated by patients with CR after surgery. However, CR is a heterogeneous condition and specific subgroups of patients are likely to benefit from different interventions. More studies are needed to inform evidence-based clinical guidelines for the treatment of patients with CR. A broader preoperative assessment in patients with CR improved the description of patient-reported neck disability.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Linköping: Linköping University Electronic Press, 2015. 95 p.
Series
Linköping University Medical Dissertations, ISSN 0345-0082 ; 1480
National Category
Physiotherapy Neurology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-122695 (URN)10.3384/diss.diva-122695 (DOI)978-91-7685-959-9 (ISBN)
Public defence
2015-12-11, Berzeliussalen, Campus US, Linköping, 09:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2015-11-16 Created: 2015-11-16 Last updated: 2015-11-24Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(349 kB)1048 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 349 kBChecksum SHA-512
a0814abe7385b1bab19b91d4f897e37b045334b5b2662a25eb4f8da13064f23d1d673c3aeaf7af2e275c1e2cf10f10011bd782d6be3c292d3e9242d51d369810
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Wibault, JohannaPeolsson, Anneli
By organisation
Division of PhysiotherapyFaculty of Health Sciences
In the same journal
Manual Therapy
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 1048 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 435 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf