Reliability of cervicocephalic sense of force.

Cervicocephalic proprioception (CCP) is an important assessment item for people with a range of clinical conditions, where reduced CCP is associated with neck pain and imbalance. Reliability has been established for a range of positional and movements tests, but there is limited data regarding sense of force, particularly across three planes of movement. The current test-retest study assessed reliability when evaluating sense of force in healthy adults (8 males, 6 females, mean age 31.50 years [SD 10.14]) over two sessions, 4-7 days apart. A force matching protocol was used to evaluate reliability of absolute error (AE), constant error (CE), and variable error (VE) for 10 % and 25 % maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) target forces for flexion, extension, lateral flexion, and rotation. Participants were strapped to a chair to limit trunk movement and data was captured using a compressive force transducer fixed to an adjustable wall mount. Six trials were performed for each contraction-type, totaling 72 submaximal MVCs per session. ICC estimates for AE (0.15-0.77), CE (0.01-0.85), and VE (0.00-0.83) were varied and confidence intervals were mostly wide. Considering lower limits of confidence intervals, CE had best reliability values generally, but more specifically the most reliable contraction type and movement was 25 % MVC flexion (ICC 0.85, confidence interval 0.54-0.95). This study found that reliability for sense of force testing was dependent upon contraction, type of error, and target force utilized. Further reliability analysis should be performed when applying this test to measure validity outcomes in clinical populations.

The validity of a single inertial sensor to assess cervical active range of motion.

Cervical active range of motion (AROM) is an important outcome measure for clinicians working with a range of patient populations, especially people with neck pain. Multi-sensor inertial measurement unit (IMU) devices demonstrate good validity in the research laboratory but are expensive and not easily accessible in clinical settings. The use of single-IMU devices has been proposed but their validity for measuring cervical AROM is unknown. A concurrent and content validity study was conducted, comparing accuracy of single-IMU NeckCare Pro™ with multi-IMU Xsens™ for measuring cervical AROM in healthy adults (8 males, 7 females, mean age 30.6 years [SD 10.4]). Cervical AROM was assessed for flexion, extension, rotation (right and left), and lateral flexion (right and left), whereby six repetitions were performed for each movement with the subjects strapped to a high-back chair. Regarding content validity, Xsens™ detected a small amount of thoracic movement that could not be detected by the NeckCare Pro™ during cervical AROM testing, with means ranging from 1.5° to 4.1°. However, this did not significantly impact concurrent validity, which was good for all movements (ICC 0.764 - 0.966). This paper found that single-IMU technology (NeckCare Pro™) had good validity for measuring cervical AROM in healthy adults when subjects were strapped to a chair to limit trunk movement.