Intra- and inter-rater reliability of thoracic spine mobility and posture assessments in subjects with thoracic spine pain

Jani Takatalo, Jari Ylinen, Tuomo Pienimäki, Arja Häkkinen, Jani Takatalo, Jari Ylinen, Tuomo Pienimäki, Arja Häkkinen

Abstract

Background: The thoracic spine (TS) has been neglected in the study of the spine despite its essential role in the stability and posture of the entire spinal complex. Therefore, there is an inevitable need to investigate the reproducibility of different thoracic spinal posture measures used in subjects with TS pain.

Methods: Thirty-two subjects (16 females and 16 males, mean age 39 years) were evaluated by two physiotherapists on the same day to gauge inter-rater reliability and on two consecutive days to gauge intra-rater reliability. TS posture was assessed by observation, and thoracic spine mobility was measured by manual assessment of segmental flexion and extension mobility in a seated position. Additionally, posterior-to-anterior accessory mobility in a prone position was assessed manually. Moreover, cervicothoracic flexion in a seated position, thoracic posture, and thoracic flexion and extension mobility in a standing position were assessed with a tape measure, and flexion and extension mobility in a seated position and TS posture in seated and standing positions were measured with an inclinometer. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), mean difference (MD), Bland-Altman (B&A) plot features and coefficient of repeatability (CR) were calculated.

Results: The mean and standard deviation (SD) of the duration of TS pain was 22 (SD 45) months, with the intensity of pain being rated at 27 (SD 21) mm on a visual analogue scale (VAS). Intra-rater reliability was very strong (ICC ≥ 0.80) for the evaluation of seated and standing upper TS posture, standing whole TS posture and seated lower TS posture with an inclinometer. Moreover, TS posture evaluation with a measuring tape, posture inspection in a seated position, and manual assessment of segmental extension were found to have very strong intra-rater reliability. Inter-rater reliability was very strong for inclinometer measurements of standing and seated upper TS posture as well as standing whole TS posture.

Conclusion: Intra-rater reliability was higher than inter-rater reliability in most of the evaluated measurements. Overall, posture measurements with an inclinometer were more reliable than mobility measurements with the same instrument. The manual assessments can be used reliably when same evaluator performs the examination.

Trial registration: Clinical Trials, NCT01884818. Registered 24 June 2013, https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT01884818?cond=thoracic+spine&cntry=FI&rank=1.

Keywords: Clinical examination; Inclinometer; Manual therapy; Observation; Pain; Palpation; Reliability; Spine; Tape measure; Thoracic.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The assessments of the thoracic spine extension with inclinometer in sitting. The assessments were performed in upper thoracic spine (a; Th1), mid-thoracic spine (b; Th6), and lower thoracic spine (c; Th12). Similar measurements were performed in maximum flexion of the thoracic spine. The thoracic spine posture was evaluated in same three locations in sitting and standing while subject maintained his/her typical posture
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Manual assessment of the thoracic spine mobility. Each thoracic spine movement segment of the thoracic spine was palpated in sitting (a-c) and prone (d). In sitting, segmental evaluation started from the neutral position of the segment (a), followed by guided flexion (b) and extension (c) movement while physical therapist palpated the interspinous space to evaluate the mobility of the thoracic spine segment. In prone (d), posterior-anterior pressure was applied to feel the accessory movement of each thoracic spine segment

References

    1. Briggs AM, Smith AJ, Straker LM, Bragge P. Thoracic spine pain in the general population: prevalence, incidence and associated factors in children, adolescents and adults. A systematic reviw. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2009;10:77.
    1. Niemeläinen R, Videman T, Battie MC. Prevalence and characteristics of upper or mid-back pain in Finnish men. Spine. 2006;31:1846–1849.
    1. Briggs AM, Bragge P, Smith AJ, Govil D, Straker LM. Prevalence and associated factors fot thoracic spine pain in the adult working population. A literature review. J Occup Health. 2009;51:177–192.
    1. Edmondston SJ, Singer KP. Thoracic spine: anatomical and biomechanical considerations for manual therapy. Man Ther. 1997;2:132–143.
    1. Willems J, Jull G, Ng J. An in vivo study of the primary and coupled rotations of the thoracic spine. Clin Biomech. 1996;11:311–316.
    1. Liebsch C, Graf N, Appelt K, Wilke HJ. The rib cage stabilizes the human thoracic spine: An in vitro study using stepwise reduction of rib cage structures. PLoS One. 2017;12(6):e0178733.
    1. White AA, III, Panjabi MM. Clinical biomechanics of the spine. 2. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 1990. pp. 85–126.
    1. Tsang SM, Szeto GP, Lee RY. Normal kinematics of the neck: the interplay between the cervical and thoracic spines. Man Ther. 2013;18:431–437.
    1. Edmondston SJ, Ferguson A, Ippersiel P, Ronningen L, Sodeland S, Barclay L. Clinical and radiological investigation of thoracic spine extension motion during bilateral arm elevation. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012;42:861–869.
    1. Wirth B, Amstalden M, Perk M, Boutellier U, Humphreys BK. Respiratory dysfunction in patients with chronic neck pain - influence of thoracic spine and chest mobility. Man Ther. 2014;19:440–444.
    1. van Kleef M, Stolker RJ, Lataster A, Geurts J, Benzon HT, Mekhail N. Thoracic pain. Pain Practice. 2010;10:327–338.
    1. Conroy JL, Schneiders AG. The T4 syndrome. Man Ther. 2005;10:292–296.
    1. Dwyer A, Aprill C, Bogduk N. Cervical zygapophyseal joint pain patterns. I: a study in normal volunteers. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1990;15:453–457.
    1. DeFranca GG, Levine LJ. The T4 syndrome. J Manip Physiol Ther. 1995;18:34–37.
    1. Manchikanti L, Singh V, Pampati V, Beyer CD, Damron KS. Evaluation of the prevalence of facet joint pain in chronic thoracic pain. Pain Phys. 2002;5:354–359.
    1. Dreyfuss P, Tibiletti C, Dreyer SJ. Thoracic zygapophyseal joint pain patterns. A study in normal volunteers. Spine. 1994;19:807–811.
    1. Fukui S, Ohseto K, Shiotani M. Patterns of pain induced by distending the thoracic zygapophyseal joints. Reg Anesth. 1997;22:332–336.
    1. Beynon AM, Hebert JJ, Walker BF. The interrater reliability of static palpation of the thoracic spine for eliciting tenderness and stiffness to test for a manipulable lesion. Chiropr Man Therap. 2018;4;26:49.
    1. Huijbregts PA. Spinal motion palpation: a review of reliability studies. J Manual Manip Ther. 2002;10:24–39.
    1. Haneline MT, Young M. A review of intraexaminer and interexaminer reliability of static spinal palpation: a literature synthesis. J Manip Physiol Ther. 2009;32:379–386.
    1. Barrett E, McCreesh K, Lewis J. Reliability and validity of non-radiographic methods of thoracic kyphosis measurement: a systematic review. Man Ther. 2014;19:10–17.
    1. Williams R, Binkley J, Bloch R, Goldsmith CH, Minuk T. Reliability of the modified-modified Schober and double inclinometer methods for measuring lumbar flexion and extension. Phys Ther. 1993;73:33–44.
    1. Heneghan NR, Gormley S, Hallam C, Rushton A. Management of thoracic spine pain and dysfunction: a survey of clinical practice in the UK. Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2019;39:58–66.
    1. Karas S, Schneiders A, Reid D, Talisa V. Factors affecting confidence and knowledge in spinal palpation among international manual physical therapists. J Manual Manip Ther. 2016;24:166–173.
    1. Viikari-Juntura E, Takala EP, Alaranta H. Neck and shoulder pain and disability. Evaluation by repetitive gripping test. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1988;20:167–173.
    1. Magee DJ. Orthopedic physical assessment. 4. Phladelphia: Saunders; 2002. pp. 168, 437, 445–168, 446, 454.
    1. Póvoa LC, Ferreira APA, Silva JG. Validation of palpatory methods for evaluating anatomical bone landmarks of cervical spine: a systematic review. J Manip Physiol Ther. 2015;38:302–310.
    1. Norlander S, Aste-Norlander U, Nordgren B, Sahlstedt B. A clinical method for measuring segmental flexion mobility in the cervico-thoracic spine and a model for classification. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1995;27:89–98.
    1. Czaprowski D, Pawlowska P, Gebicka A, Sitarski D, Kotwicki T. Intra- and Interobserver repeatability of the assessment of Anteroposterior curvatures of the spine using Saunders digital inclinometer. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil. 2012;2:145–153.
    1. Kaltenborn FM. Basic evaluation and mobilization techniques. 2. Oslo: Olaf Norlis Bokhandel; 1993. The spine; p. 215, 223, 227.
    1. Hengeveld E, Banks . Maitland's Vertebral Manipulation: Management of Neuromusculoskeletal Disorders. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2013. p. 202.
    1. Walter SD, Eliasziw M, Donner A. Sample size and optimal designs for reliability studies. Stat Med. 1998;17:3101–3110.
    1. Evans J. Straightforward statistics for the behavioral sciences. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing; 1996.
    1. Vaz S, Falkmer T, Passmore AE, Parsons R, Andreou P. The case for using the repeatability coefficient when calculating test-retest reliability. PLoS One. 8(9):e73990.
    1. Ng JK, Kippers V, Richardson CA, Parnianpour M. Range of motion and lordosis of the lumbar spine: reliability of measurement and normative values. Spine. 2001;26:53–60.
    1. Tousignant M, Boucher N, Bourbonnais J, Gravelle T, Quesnel M, Brosseau L. Intratester and intertester reliability of the Cybex electronic digital inclinometer (EDI−320) for measurement of active neck flexion and extension in healthy subjects. Man Ther. 2001;6:235–241.
    1. Griegel-Morris P, Larson K, Mueller-Klaus K, Oatis CA. Incidence of common postural abnormalities in the cervical, shoulder, and thoracic regions and their association with pain in two age groups of healthy subjects. Phys Ther. 1992;72:425–431.
    1. Cleland JA, Childs JD, Fritz JM, Whitman JM. Interrater reliability of the history and physical examination in patients with mechanical neck pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87:1388–1395.
    1. Gonella C, Paris SV, Kutner M. Reliability in evaluating passive intervertebral motion. Phys Ther. 1982;62:436–444.
    1. van Trijffel E, Anderegg Q, Bossuyt PM, Lucas C. Inter-examiner reliability of passive assessment of intervertebral motion in the cervical and lumbar spine: a systematic review. Man Ther. 2005;10:256–269.
    1. Hansen BE, Simonsen T, Leboeuf-Yde C. Motion palpation of the lumbar spine—a problem with the test or the tester? J Manip Physiol Ther. 2006;29:208–212.
    1. Christensen HW, Vach W, Vach K, Manniche C, Haghfelt T, Hartvigsen L, et al. Palpation of the upper thoracic spine: An observer reliability study. J Manip Physiol Ther. 2002;25:285–292.
    1. Brismée J, Gipson D, Ivie D, Lopez A, Moore M, Matthijs O, et al. Interrater reliability of a passive physiological intervertebral motion test in the mid-thoracic spine. J Manip Physiol Ther. 2006;29:368–373.
    1. Potter L, McCarthy C, Oldham J. Intraexaminer reliability of identifying a dysfunctional segment in the thoracic and lumbar spine. J Manip Physiol Ther, 2006/0. 29:203–7.
    1. Robinson R, Robinson HS, Bjorke G, Kvale A. Reliability and validity of a palpation technique for identifying the spinous processes of C7 and L5. Man Ther. 2009;14:409–414.
    1. Heiderscheit B, Boissonnault W. Reliability of joint mobility and pain assessment of the thoracic spine and rib cage in asymptomatic individuals. J Manual Manip Ther. 2008;16:210–216.
    1. Walker BF, Koppenhaver SL, Stomski NJ, Hebert JJ. Interrater reliability of motion palpation in the thoracic spine. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2015;2015:815407.
    1. Haas M, Panzer D, Peterson D, Raphael R. Short-term responsiveness of manual thoracic end-play assessment to spinal manipulation: a randomized controlled trial of construct validity. J Manip Physiol Ther. 1995;18:582–589.
    1. Gavin D. The effect of joint manipulation techniques on active range of motion in the mid-thoracic spine of asymptomatic subjects. J Manual Manip Ther. 1999;7:114–122.
    1. Schiller L. Effectiveness of spinal manipulative therapy in the treatment of mechanical thoracic spine pain: A pilot randomized clinical trial. J Manip Physiol Ther. 2001;24:394–401.
    1. Sung YB, Lee JH, Park YH. Effects of thoracic mobilization and manipulation on function and mental state in chronic lower back pain. J Phys Ther Sci. 2014;26:1711–1714.
    1. Hole DE, Cook JM, Bolton JE. Reliability and concurrent validity of two instruments for measuring cervical range of motion: effects of age and gender. Man Ther. 1995;1:36–42.
    1. Portek I, Pearcy MJ, Reader GP, Mowat AG. Correlation between radiographic and clinical measurement of lumbar spine movement. Br J Rheumatol. 1983;22:197–205.
    1. Rondinelli R, Murphy J, Esler A, Marciano T, Cholmakjian C. Estimation of normal lumbar flexion with surface inclinometry – a comparison of three methods. Am J Phys Med Rehab. 1992;71:219–224.
    1. Post RB, Leferink VJM. Spinal mobility: sagittal range of motion measured with the SpinalMouse, a new non-invasive device. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2004;124:187–192.
    1. Mannion AF, Knecht K, Balaban G, Dvorak J, Grob D. A new skin-surface device for measuring the curvature and global and segmental ranges of motion of the spine: reliability of measurements and comparison with data reviewed from the literature. Eur Spine J. 2004;13:122–136.
    1. Alricsson M, Björklund G, Cronholm M, Olsson O, Viklund P, Svantesson U. Spinal alignment, mobility of the hip and thoracic spine and prevalence of low back pain in young elite cross-country skiers. J Exerc Rehab. 2018;12:21–28.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다