Digitala Vetenskapliga Arkivet

Endre søk
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Intra- and inter-rater reliability of movement and palpation tests in patients with neck pain: A systematic review
Umeå universitet, Medicinska fakulteten, Institutionen för samhällsmedicin och rehabilitering.
2018 (engelsk)Inngår i: Physiotherapy Theory and Practice, ISSN 0959-3985, E-ISSN 1532-5040, Vol. 34, nr 3, s. 165-180Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

Neck pain is common and often becomes chronic. Various clinical tests of the cervical spine are used to direct and evaluate treatment. This systematic review aimed to identify studies examining the intra- and/or interrater reliability of tests used in clinical examination of patients with neck pain. A database search up to April 2016 was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, and AMED. The Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies Checklist (QAREL) was used to assess risk of bias. Eleven studies were included, comprising tests of active and passive movement and pain evaluating participants with ongoing neck pain. One study was assessed with a low risk of bias, three with medium risk, while the rest were assessed with high risk of bias. The results showed differing reliabilities for the included tests ranging from poor to almost perfect. In conclusion, active movement and pain for pain or mobility overall presented acceptable to very good reliability (Kappa >0.40); while passive intervertebral tests had lower Kappa values, suggesting poor reliability. It may be a coincidence that the studies indicating very good reliability tended to be of higher quality (low to moderate risk of bias), while studies finding poor reliability tended to be of lower quality (high risk of bias). Regardless, the current recommendation from this review would suggest the clinical use of tests with acceptable reliability and avoiding the use of tests that have been shown to not be reliable. Finally, it is critical that all future reliability studies are of higher quality with low risk of bias.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC , 2018. Vol. 34, nr 3, s. 165-180
Emneord [en]
Manual therapy, physical examination, range of movement, rehabilitation, reproducibility of results
HSV kategori
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-144359DOI: 10.1080/09593985.2017.1390806ISI: 000419989700001PubMedID: 29111857Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85041295707OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-144359DiVA, id: diva2:1179879
Tilgjengelig fra: 2018-02-02 Laget: 2018-02-02 Sist oppdatert: 2025-02-11bibliografisk kontrollert

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltekst mangler i DiVA

Andre lenker

Forlagets fulltekstPubMedScopus
Av organisasjonen
I samme tidsskrift
Physiotherapy Theory and Practice

Søk utenfor DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Totalt: 127 treff
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf