Validation of the Cervical Torsion Test and Head Neck Differentiation Test in Patients with Peripheral Vestibular Hypofunction.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared adults with peripheral vestibular hypofunction (VH) to healthy controls and assessed the sensitivity and specificity of the Cervical Torsion Test (CTT) and the Head Neck Differentiation Test (HNDT). This study aimed to determine whether neck problems affected primary outcomes. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included adults from a specialist consultation for dizziness. VH had been diagnosed with the video Head Impulse Test. Exclusion criteria were conditions following head or neck trauma and diseases of the central nervous system. Sensitivity and specificity of the index tests were calculated, and regression analyses were performed to test for contributing factors. RESULTS: A total of 19 patients with VH and a historical cohort of 19 matched healthy controls were included. Most patients with VH (84.2%) experienced symptoms in at least 1 test component, compared to 5.2% of the control group. Of patients with VH, 78.9% had symptoms during the HNDT "en bloc" (en bloc = head and trunk rotated together) whereas only 26.3% reported symptoms during the CTT en bloc. Best discriminatory validity was found for the HNDT en bloc, with a sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI = 0.54-0.94), a specificity of 0.86 (95% CI = 0.65-0.97), and a positive likelihood ratio of 5.79 (95% CI = 1.97-17.00). The number of symptoms of CTT "in torsion" (in torsion = trunk rotated actively with fixed head) was increased by a factor of 1.13 (95% CI = 1.01-1.27) for every additional point on the Neck Disability Index. CONCLUSIONS: The CTT and HNDT can serve as nonlaboratory tests in patients with dizziness. The HNDT en bloc has the best discriminatory validity, finding those with and those without VH. Symptom reproduction during torsion may help to identify when neck problems may contribute to dizziness. IMPACT: The HNDT en bloc may be useful for ruling VH in or out in patients with dizziness. Positive CTT and HNDT in torsion components may verify the likelihood of additional neck involvement.

Cervical musculoskeletal impairments and pressure pain sensitivity in office workers with headache.

BACKGROUND: Office workers are specifically vulnerable to headache conditions. Neck pain is reported by almost 80% of patients with headaches. Associations between currently recommended tests to examine cervical musculoskeletal impairments, pressure pain sensitivity and self-reported variables in headache, are unknown. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether cervical musculoskeletal impairments and pressure pain sensitivity are associated with self-reported headache variables in office workers. METHODS: This study reports a cross-sectional analysis using baseline data of a randomized controlled trial. Office workers with headache were included in this analysis. Multivariate associations, controlled for age, sex and neck pain, between cervical musculoskeletal variables (strength, endurance, range of motion, movement control) and pressure pain threshold (PPT) over the neck and self-reported headache variables, such as frequency, intensity, and the Headache-Impact-Test-6, were examined. RESULTS: Eighty-eight office workers with a 4-week headache frequency of 4.8 (±5.1) days, a moderate average headache intensity (4.5 ± 2.1 on the NRS), and "some impact" (mean score: 53.7 ± 7.9) on the headache-impact-test-6, were included. Range of motion and PPT tested over the upper cervical spine were found to be most consistently associated with any headache variable. An adjusted R2 of 0.26 was found to explain headache intensity and the score on the Headache-Impact-Test-6 by several cervical musculoskeletal and PPT variables. DISCUSSION: Cervical musculoskeletal impairments can explain, irrespective of coexisting neck pain, only little variability of the presence of headache in office workers. Neck pain is likely a symptom of the headache condition, and not a separate entity.

Inter-rater reliability, discriminatory and predictive validity of neck movement control tests in office workers with headache and/or neck pain.

BACKGROUND: Movement control tests (MCTs) are clinical tests to evaluate impairment of movement and associated neuromuscular control and are commonly used to evaluate people with neck pain or headache conditions. The aim of this study was to establish inter-rater reliability as well as discriminatory and predictive validity for seven MCTs of the upper (UCS) and lower cervical spine (LCS) in office workers with headache or neck pain. METHODS: Seven MCTs of the UCS (3) and LCS (4) were performed at baseline on 140 office workers which were included in a cluster randomized controlled trial. The occurrences of headache and neck pain were established at baseline (discriminatory validity) and at a 15-month follow-up (predictive validity). Inter-rater-reliability was established in a separate cross-sectional study. RESULTS: MCTs showed slight to almost perfect inter-rater reliability but limited discriminatory (baseline) and limited to small predictive validity (15-month follow up) for different subgroups of office workers with headache and/or neck pain. MCTs of the UCS showed limited discriminatory validity, especially for rotation in participants with headache and neck pain compared to those with headache only (Negative Likelihood-ratio: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.69-0.98). Participants with neck pain only and ≥1/4 positive MCTs for the sagittal plane had an increased risk for future neck pain (Relative risk: 3.33, 95% CI: 1.05-10.56). DISCUSSION: MCTs of the UCS and LCS are reliable but have only limited to small validity to predict future headache events in office workers. Insufficient sagittal plane movement control may predict neck pain relapses in the future.

Feasibility and cost description of highly intensive rehabilitation involving new technologies in patients with post-acute stroke-a trial of the Swiss RehabTech Initiative.

BACKGROUND: There is a need to provide highly repetitive and intensive therapy programs for patients after stroke to improve sensorimotor impairment. The employment of technology-assisted training may facilitate access to individualized rehabilitation of high intensity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and acceptance of a high-intensity technology-assisted training for patients after stroke in the subacute or chronic phase and to establish its feasibility for a subsequent randomized controlled trial. METHODS: A longitudinal, multi-center, single-group study was conducted in four rehabilitation clinics. Patients participated in a high-intensity 4-week technology-assisted trainings consisting of 3 to 5 training days per week and at least 5 training sessions per day with a duration of 45 min each. Feasibility was evaluated by examining recruitment, intervention-related outcomes (adherence, subjectively perceived effort and effectiveness, adverse events), patient-related outcomes, and efficiency gains. Secondary outcomes focused on all three domains of the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health. Data were analyzed and presented in a descriptive manner. RESULTS: In total, 14 patients after stroke were included. Participants exercised between 12 and 21 days and received between 28 and 82 (mean 46 ± 15) technology-assisted trainings during the study period, which corresponded to 2 to 7 daily interventions. Treatment was safe. No serious adverse events were reported. Minor adverse events were related to tiredness and exertion. From baseline to the end of the intervention, patients improved in several functional performance assessments of the upper and lower extremities. The efficiency gains of the trainings amounted to 10% to 58%, in particular for training of the whole body and for walking training in severely impaired patients. CONCLUSIONS: Highly intensive technology-assisted training appears to be feasible for in- and outpatients in the subacute or chronic phase after stroke. Further clinical trials are warranted in order to define the most comprehensive approach to highly intensive technology-assisted training and to investigate its efficacy in patients with neurological disorders. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03641651 at August 31st 2018.

Head kinematics in patients with neck pain compared to asymptomatic controls: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Neck pain is one of the most common musculoskeletal disorders encountered by healthcare providers. A precise assessment of functional deficits, including sensorimotor control impairment, is regarded necessary for tailored exercise programmes. Sensorimotor control can be measured by kinematic characteristics, such as velocity, acceleration, smoothness, and temporal measures, or by assessing movement accuracy. This systematic review aims to identify movement tasks and distinct outcome variables used to measure kinematics and movement accuracy in patients with neck pain and present their results in comparison to asymptomatic controls. METHODS: Electronic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, PEDro, Cochrane Library and CINAHL databases from inception to August 2020. Risk of bias of included studies was assessed. Movement tasks and specific outcome parameters used were collated. The level of evidence for potential group differences in each outcome variable between patients with neck pain and controls was evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies examining head kinematics and movement accuracy during head-aiming, functional and unconstrained movement tasks of the head were included. Average Risk of Bias of included studies was moderate. In total, 23 different outcome variables were assessed. A strong level of evidence for an increased movement time and for an increased number of errors during head aiming tasks was found. Moderate evidence was found in traumatic neck pain for a decreased mean velocity, peak acceleration, and reaction time, and for point deviation and time on target during head aiming tasks. Moderate evidence was found for decreased acceleration during unconstrained movements, too. Results on the remaining movement task and outcome variables showed only limited, very limited or even conflicting level of evidence for patients with neck pain to differ from controls. CONCLUSIONS: Sensorimotor control in NP in the way of kinematic and movement accuracy characteristics of head motion was examined in head aiming, functional or unconstrained movement tasks. The results from this review indicate that for some characteristics that describe sensorimotor control, patients with NP differ from healthy controls. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020139083.

A Two Joint Neck Model to Identify Malposition of the Head Relative to the Thorax.

Neck pain is a frequent health complaint. Prolonged protracted malpositions of the head are associated with neck pain and headaches and could be prevented using biofeedback systems. A practical biofeedback system to detect malpositions should be realized with a simple measurement setup. To achieve this, a simple biomechanical model representing head orientation and translation relative to the thorax is introduced. To identify the parameters of this model, anthropometric data were acquired from eight healthy volunteers. In this work we determine (i) the accuracy of the proposed model when the neck length is known, (ii) the dependency of the neck length on the body height, and (iii) the impact of a wrong neck length on the models accuracy. The resulting model is able to describe the motion of the head with a maximum uncertainty of 5 mm only. To achieve this high accuracy the effective neck length must be known a priory. If however, this parameter is assumed to be a linear function of the palpable neck length, the measurement error increases. Still, the resulting accuracy can be sufficient to identify and monitor a protracted malposition of the head relative to the thorax.

Joint position error after neck protraction-retraction movements in healthy office workers: a cross-sectional study.

Since the upper cervical spine (UCS) has been regarded to be distinct from the lower cervical spine (LCS), joint position error (JPE) needs to be tested separately for both regions. The purpose of this study was to investigate the JPE after cervical protraction/retraction movements, involving opposite movements of extension and flexion for the UCS and LCS. These movements are frequently performed during office work. Cervical JPEs were tracked in thirty healthy office workers while performing four tests of cervical pro-retraction movements with variations in vision and movement direction, and assessed using the Kinect head tracker (Microsoft Corp), placed in front of each participant. The JPE was expressed in constant (CE), absolute (AE) and variable errors (VE). Multilevel linear models evaluated main and interaction effects of vision, movement direction, cervical region and sex. Slightly larger JPEs have been found in the UCS. Vision showed no effect on any outcome variable. No effect exceeded typical measurement errors reported for the Kinect head tracker. This study showed, that JPEs after pro-retraction movements of the head and neck may differ for UCS and LCS. The differences were small and not beyond measurement error reported for the Kinect.

Correction to: On-site multi-component intervention to improve productivity and reduce the economic and personal burden of neck pain in Swiss office-workers (NEXpro): protocol for a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

On-site multi-component intervention to improve productivity and reduce the economic and personal burden of neck pain in Swiss office-workers (NEXpro): protocol for a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Non-specific neck pain and headache are major economic and individual burden in office-workers. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of a multi-component intervention combining workstation ergonomics, health promotion information group workshops, neck exercises, and an app to enhance intervention adherence to assess possible reductions in the economic and individual burden of prevalent and incident neck pain and headache in office workers. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a stepped wedge cluster-randomized controlled trial. Eligible participants will be any office-worker aged 18-65 years from two Swiss organisations in the Cantons of Zurich and Aargau, working more than 25 h a week in predominantly sedentary office work and without serious health conditions of the neck. One hundred twenty voluntary participants will be assigned to 15 clusters which, at randomly selected time steps, switch from the control to the intervention group. The intervention will last 12 weeks and comprises workstation ergonomics, health promotion information group workshops, neck exercises and an adherence app. The primary outcome will be health-related productivity losses (presenteeism, absenteeism) using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are neck disability and pain (measured by the Neck Disability Index, and muscle strength and endurance measures), headache (measured by the short-form headache impact test), psychosocial outcomes (e.g. job-stress index, Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire), workplace outcomes (e.g. workstation ergonomics), adherence to intervention, and additional measures (e.g. care-seeking). Measurements will take place at baseline, 4 months, 8 months, and 12 months after commencement. Data will be analysed on an intention to treat basis and per protocol. Primary and secondary outcomes will be examined using linear mixed-effects models. DISCUSSION: To the authors' knowledge, this study is the first that investigates the impact of a multi-component intervention combining current evidence of effective interventions with an adherence app to assess the potential benefits on productivity, prevalent and incident neck pain, and headache. The outcomes will impact the individual, their workplace, as well as private and public policy by offering evidence for treatment and prevention of neck pain and headache in office-workers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04169646. Registered 15 November 2019 - Retrospectively registered.

Concurrent validity and reliability of a mobile tracking technology to measure angular and linear movements of the neck.

The neck can be moved in six degrees of freedom. Current 3D-optoelectronic motion-capture systems capable of measuring these movements are inappropriate for use in clinical practice because they are stationary, expensive and time-consuming. We therefore developed a less complex 3D-tracking technology based on Steam®VR to measure six degrees of freedom in a clinical setting. The aim of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of this system. The developed prototype consists of two infrared-emitting lighthouses and sensors, mounted on the participant's helmet and trunk belt, to detect the orientation of the head and trunk. The system was evaluated by means of an infrared light-reflecting marker tracking system. Twenty healthy participants, equipped with these sensors and markers, performed thirteen neck movement tasks. Linear and angular movements were measured. These tasks were repeated after six to eight days to assess test-retest reliability. Concurrent validity was assessed by the root mean square error, and reliability with generalizability theory. With an average root mean square error between 1.2 and 2.0° in angular and 0.4-0.5 cm in linear movements, the prototype was shown to precisely track these movements. Reliability of the prototype and the reference system was comparable for all tasks. A high contribution of participant's variability to the observed variance was generally detected, with the exception of joint repositioning error and upper cervical flexion. The reliability was task-specific and did not differ between the systems. The prototype system was shown to be valid, although the reliability of the repositioning and upper cervical flexion tests needs to be reconsidered.

Clinical assessment of cervical movement sense in those with neck pain compared to asymptomatic individuals.

BACKGROUND: A simple clinical test involving subject tracing zigzag (ZZ) and figure of eight (F8) patterns with a head mounted laser device in determining cervical movement sense has proven reliability and feasibility. However, its validity in comparing individuals with and without neck pain (NP) has not been examined. METHODS: Seventy-six subjects (38 NP and 38 asymptomatic subjects) performed both patterns while motion of their laser point was videoed. Independent examiners subsequently rated the videos (real-time) to record the time needed and the number of errors when completing each task. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-) for various cut-offs to optimise clinical interpretation were determined. Comparisons between 25 subjects with idiopathic neck pain versus 13 with whiplash-associated disorders were also undertaken. RESULTS: All outcome variables except ZZ time were significantly different between individuals with NP and controls. Optimal cut-offs of 9 and 10 errors yielded LR+/LR- of 3.67/0.17 (F8) and 3.00/0.38 (ZZ). Whiplash patients performed the ZZ task faster with similar errors to those with idiopathic neck pain. CONCLUSION: The clinical utility of this inexpensive measure to assess cervical movement sense in people with NP is supported. Moderate LRs+ were demonstrated for number of errors for both patterns. Individuals with NP generated significantly more errors while tracing each pattern. Optimal cut offs of 9 errors for ZZ and 10 errors for F8 were established. Overall, these tests appear to be clinically suitable to determine altered cervical movement sense in those with NP.

Intra-rater reliability of determining positions of cervical spinous processes and measuring their relative distances : An update to define rigid bodies of the cervical spine in a movement laboratory setting.

OBJECTIVES: A reliable detection of bony landmarks of the spine is necessary in order to determine rigid bodies and to reduce the variability of marker placement in a movement laboratory setting. In a first study on the thoracic and lumbar spine, we demonstrated that placing markers on their relative positions between two major landmarks was superior to palpation of specific bony landmarks. The aims of this study were to examine the intra-rater reliability when palpating for spinous processes (SPs) of the second (C2) and seventh cervical vertebrae (C7), to determine the distances between C2 and C7 and the relative position of C7 along the length between C2 and the posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) level. RESULTS: The intra-rater reliability in determining the distance between C2 and C7 was found to be substantial, with an intra-rater reliability of 0.75 (95% confidence limits 0.55-0.99) and a standard error of the measurement of 0.34 cm. The relative distance of C7 along the total C2-PSIS length was estimated to be 11.5%. The determination of the relative positions of spinal landmarks through measurement is considered superior to their palpation, because it relies on a reproducible and comparable definition of rigid bodies.

Intra and interrater reliability and clinical feasibility of a simple measure of cervical movement sense in patients with neck pain.

BACKGROUND: Pattern tracing tasks can be used to assess cervical spine movement sense (CMS). A simple clinical measure of CMS (tracing fixed figure-of-eight (F8) and zigzag (ZZ) patterns with a head mounted laser) has been proposed and assessed in asymptomatic subjects. It is important to determine if examiner ratings of the traces are reliable and feasible for clinical use in those with neck pain. We therefore examined the intra- and inter-rater reliability of rating video recordings of the CMS tasks, and the feasibility of undertaking the tests in clinic by comparing slow motion versus real-time video ratings. METHODS: Cross-sectional study examining neck pain subjects from a physiotherapy clinic. F8 and ZZ patterns traced with a head-mounted laser pointer at two velocities (accurate; accurate & fast) were videoed and later examined. Time (total time taken to complete the pattern), error frequency (number of deviations) and error magnitude (sum of deviations multiplied by distance from the central line) were measured. Two assessors independently evaluated the laser tracing videos in slow motion; a third rated the videos in real time. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and standard error of measurements (SEM) were calculated for intra- and inter-tester reliability, and feasibility. RESULTS: Twenty neck pain patient (13 women) videos were assessed. Intra-and inter-rater reliability was substantial to almost-perfect (ICC 0.76-1.00; SEM < 0.01-2.50). Feasibility was moderate to almost-perfect (ICC 0.54-1; SEM <  0.01-2.98). CONCLUSIONS: Video (slow motion) ratings of time and errors for F8 and ZZ movement patterns in neck pain subjects showed high intra and inter-rater reliability. Achieving reliable ratings in clinic (real-time) appears feasible. Synthesising our results, the most reliable and feasible CMS ratings appear to be when the subject uses accurate rather than accurate and fast execution. The ZZ movement pattern may be superior to F8 in terms of rating. Time and error frequency for tracing F8 and ZZ as accurately as possible in determining CMS appears promising for use in clinic. Future research directions were identified.

Immediate effects of cervical unilateral anterior-posterior mobilisation on shoulder pain and impairment in post-operative arthroscopy patients.

BACKGROUND: Lateral gliding cervical spine mobilisation is shown to improve shoulder pain, disability and function. However, despite common clinical-use, no study reports the effect of unilateral anterior-posterior (A-P) cervical mobilisation on shoulder pain and function, and particularly in patients after arthroscopic shoulder surgery. OBJECTIVE: Examine the immediate effect of single-level Grade III cervical unilateral A-P mobilisation on shoulder pain, flexion and abduction range of motion (ROM) and external rotator strength compared to placebo cervical unilateral A-P light touch pressure. METHODS: Single session intervention with a crossover design in 32 (15 women) postoperative arthroscopic shoulder patients. RESULTS: Immediate and superior treatment effects were shown for A-P cervical mobilisation in improving flexion ROM, isometric strength of external rotation, and pain intensity during flexion (all p< 0.05) when compared to the placebo. However, effects may not be considered clinically meaningful. CONCLUSION: Unilateral A-P mobilisation applied to the cervical spine shows a tendency toward positively influencing post-arthroscopy shoulder pain and function. Further study examining cervical mobilisations directed in different planes to influence shoulder motion appear warranted.

Can parameters of the helical axis be measured reliably during active cervical movements?

Convex hull area (CHA) and mean angle (MA) have been proposed to describe the behaviour of the helical axis during joint kinematics. This study investigates the intra- and inter-session reliability of CHA and MA during active movements of the cervical spine. Twenty-seven healthy volunteers (19 women) aged 23 ± 2.8 years participated. Each volunteer was tested on two sessions. All participants were instructed to perform the following active movements of the cervical spine: rotation, flexion/extension and lateral bending, each performed to full range and repeated ten consecutive times. Cervical movements were registered with an electromagnetic tracking system. For each participant, each movement and each session, range of motion (ROM), CHA and MA were extracted. ROM showed high intra- and inter-session reliability during all cervical spine movements using this method. Overall, the intra- and inter-session reliability of the helical axis parameters varied depending on the movement direction and ranged from fair to almost perfect. The intra- and inter-session reliability of CHA and MA were almost perfect during rotation whereas the intra- and inter-session reliability of CHA was substantial during lateral bending and intra- and inter-session reliability of MA ranged from fair to substantial during flexion/extension and lateral bending. This is the first study to evaluate the reliability of helical axis measures during active movements of the cervical spine. The results show that CHA and MA are promising descriptors of cervical kinematics which could be applied in future studies to evaluate neck function in patients with cervical spine disorders.

Measuring lumbar reposition accuracy in patients with unspecific low back pain: systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) show a greater lumbar reposition error (RE) than healthy controls. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Studies on lumbar RE in patients with NSCLBP present conflicting results. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the available literature were performed to evaluate differences in RE between patients with NSCLBP and healthy controls. Data on absolute error, constant error (CE), and variable error were extracted and effect sizes (ESs) were calculated. For the CE flexion pattern and active extension pattern, subgroups of patients with NSCLBP were analyzed. Results of homogeneous studies were pooled. Measurement protocols and study outcomes were compared. The quality of reporting and the authors' appraisal of risk of bias were investigated. RESULTS: The original search revealed 178 records of which 13 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The majority of studies showed that patients with NSCLBP produced a significantly larger absolute error (ES, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.13-1.49) and variable error (ES, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.05-1.09) compared with controls. CE is direction specific in flexion and active extension pattern subgroups of patients with NSCLBP (ES, 0.39; 95% CI, -1.09 to 0.3) and ES, 0.18; 95% CI, -0.3 to 0.65, respectively). The quality of reporting and the authors' appraisal of risk of bias varied considerably. The applied test procedures and instrumentation varied between the studies, which hampered the comparability of studies. CONCLUSION: Although patients with NSCLBP seemed to produce a larger lumbar RE compared with healthy controls, study limitations render firm conclusions unsafe. Future studies should pay closer attention to power, precision, and reliability of the measurement approach, definition of outcome measures, and patient selection. We recommend a large, well-powered, prospective randomized control study that uses a standardized measurement approach and definitions for absolute error, CE, and variable error to address the hypothesis that proprioception may be impaired with CLBP.

Extension and flexion in the upper cervical spine in neck pain patients.

Neck pain is a common problem in the general population with high risk of ongoing complaints or relapses. Range of motion (ROM) assessment is scientifically established in the clinical process of diagnosis, prognosis and outcome evaluation in neck pain. Anatomically, the cervical spine (CS) has been considered in two regions, the upper and lower CS. Disorders like cervicogenic headache have been clinically associated with dysfunctions of the upper CS (UCS), yet ROM tests and measurements are typically conducted on the whole CS. A cross-sectional study assessing 19 subjects with non-specific neck pain was undertaken to examine UCS extension-flexion ROM in relation to self-reported disability and pain (via the Neck Disability Index (NDI)). Two measurement devices (goniometer and electromagnetic tracking) were employed and compared. Correlations between ROM and the NDI were stronger for the UCS compared to the CS, with the strongest correlation between UCS flexion and the NDI-headache (r = -0.62). Correlations between UCS and CS ROM were fair to moderate, with the strongest correlation between UCS flexion and CS extension ROM (r = -0.49). UCS flexion restriction is related to headache frequency and intensity. Consistency and agreement between both measurement systems and for all tests was high. The results demonstrate that separate UCS ROM assessments for extension and flexion are useful in patients with neck pain.

Determination of thoracic and lumbar spinal processes by their percentage position between C7 and the PSIS level.

BACKGROUND: Accurate measurements of spinal movement require reliable determination of anatomical landmarks. Current methods of identifying these are not sufficiently reliable or valid for this purpose. A reliable and convenient method of placing markers on selected vertebra is needed to compare measurements between different testers, subjects and sessions. FINDINGS: Two testers palpated T4, T7, T10, L1 and L4 spinal processes according to established criteria. They measured the position of spinal processes between C7 and the Posterior Superior Iliac Spine (PSIS) at the Pelvis independently using a flexible ruler placed on the spine. Subjects with a wide range of body heights but without visible spinal deformities were recruited for measurements. Reliability was calculated using absolute and relative values. Mean percentage position and 95% Confidence Intervals were calculated using the mean of both testers' measurement for all subjects.Twenty-two subjects participated. The mean distance between C7 and the PSIS level was 50.9 cm (SD: 3.5 cm). Relative reliability for all spinal processes was almost perfect (ICC: > 0.9). Absolute reliability values showed high agreement between testers. Percentage position of T4 was found to be situated 21% along the distance between C7 and the PSIS level, T7 at 39%, T10 at 54.1%, L1 at 70.9% and L4 at 86.1% accordingly. 95% Confidence intervals around mean percentage positions had a maximum at L1 with 2.8% range from upper to lower limit. CONCLUSIONS: The distance of three thoracic and two lumbar spinal processes can be reliably and accurately measured by independent testers, using a flexible ruler. Percentage positions between C7 and PSIS level correspond to spinal processes for subjects without visible deformities in the sagittal and frontal plane.