Intrarater reliability of cervical range of motion device in measuring cervical active range of motion in patients with chronic neck pain and respiratory dysfunction

Abstract

Methodology: We enrolled 30 patients (14 males and 16 females) with chronic neck pain and respiratory dysfunction fulfilling inclusion criteria. Two trials of CAROM measurement for flexion, extension, left and right lateral flexion and left and right rotation were performed, with a gap of one week to measure test retest reliability of CROM device. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard errors of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC) were calculated to test the intrarater reliability.
 Results: Intrarater reliability of repeated measurements of CAROM using the CROM device was found to be good. The ICC values ranged between 0.88-0.97 for flexion, 0.93-0.98 for extension, 0.92-0.98 for right lateral flexion,0.93-0.98 for left lateral flexion. For right rotation it was 0.88-0.97, for left lateral rotation it was 0.95-0.99. The standard error of measurement for these movements ranged from 1.5° to 2.9°. Minimal detectable change ranged from 3.5°for extension to 6.8°for left lateral flexion.
 Conclusion: Cervical range of motion device is a reliable tool for measuring cervical active range of motion in patients simultaneously suffering from chronic neck pain and respiratory dysfunction.
 Abbreviations: CAROM - cervical active range of motion; CROM - cervical range of motion; ICC - Intraclass correlation coefficient; SEM - standard errors of measurement; MDC - minimal detectable change
 Key words: Adult; Exercise Therapy / methods; Female; Humans; Male; Neck Pain / physiopathology; Neck Pain / therapy; Pain Measurement; Pulmonary function; Range of Motion, Articular; Reliability
 Citation: Anwar S, Arsalan SA, Zafar H, Ahmad A, Gillani SA, Hanif A. Intrarater reliability of cervical range of motion device in measuring cervical active range of motion in patients with chronic neck pain and respiratory dysfunction. Anaesth. pain intensive care 2022;26(4):503-509; DOI: 10.35975/apic.v26i4.1957
 Received: September 29, 2021; Reviewed: April 21, 2022; Accepted: May 10, 2022