Variability of Active Cervical Range of Motion Within and Between Days in Healthy Participants: A Prospective Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the intraday and interday variability and systematic change over the day of active cervical range of motion (aCROM) measurements in asymptomatic persons using a clinically applicable measurement device. METHODS: A prospective observational study was performed. Sixteen adults (8 men and 8 women, median age 51 years) without neck pain in the last 3 months were recruited in 2 physiotherapy practices. Active cervical range of motion was estimated using the Apple iPhone application "3D Range of Motion." Measurements were performed 3 times a day for 7 days and spread over a period of 3 weeks. Mean values of aCROM were calculated. Intraday and interday variability was estimated by calculating limits of agreement. RESULTS: The limits of agreement for intraday variability ranged from ±12.1° for left rotation to ±15.5° for total rotation. For interday variability, the limits of agreement ranged from ±14.2° for right rotation to ±20.1° for total rotation. No systematic change over the day was found. CONCLUSION: This study showed substantial intraday and interday variability of aCROM measurements in asymptomatic people. No trend toward an increased or decreased aCROM was observed during the course of the day. When interpreting aCROM values, clinicians should consider the degree of variation in aCROM measurements over time.

To What Degree Does Active Cervical Range of Motion Differ Between Patients With Neck Pain, Patients With Whiplash, and Those Without Neck Pain? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify differences in active cervical range of motion (aCROM) between patients with neck pain and those without neck pain, in patients with whiplash-associated disorders (WADs) and nontraumatic neck pain, and in patients with acute complaints versus those with chronic complaints. DATA SOURCES: Seven bibliographic databases were searched from inception to April 2015. In addition, a manual search was performed. STUDY SELECTION: Full articles on a numerical comparison of aCROM in patients with neck pain and asymptomatic control persons of similar ages were included. Two reviewers independently selected studies and assessed risk of bias. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers extracted the data. Pooled mean differences of aCROM were calculated using a random-effects model. DATA SYNTHESIS: The search yielded 6261 hits; 27 articles (2366 participants, 13 low risk of bias) met the inclusion criteria. The neck pain group showed less aCROM in all movement directions compared with persons without neck pain. Mean differences ranged from -7.04° (95% CI, -9.70° to -4.38°) for right lateral bending (11 studies) to -89.59° (95% CI, -131.67° to -47.51°) for total aCROM (4 studies). Patients with WADs had less aCROM than patients with nontraumatic neck pain. No conclusive differences in aCROM were found between patients with acute and patients with chronic complaints. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with neck pain have a significantly decreased aCROM compared with persons without neck pain, and patients with WADs have less aCROM than those with nontraumatic neck pain.

Intraexaminer reliability of hand-held dynamometry in the upper extremity: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize and appraise the literature on the intraexaminer reliability of hand-held dynamometry (HHD) in the upper extremity. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE were searched for relevant studies published up to December 2011. In addition, experts were contacted, and journals and reference lists were hand searched. STUDY SELECTION: To be included in the review, articles needed to (1) use a repeated-measures, within-examiner(s) design; (2) include symptomatic or asymptomatic individuals, or both; (3) use HHD to measure muscle strength in any of the joints of the shoulder, elbow, or wrist with the "make" or the "break" technique; (4) report measurements in kilogram, pound, or torque; (5) use a device that is placed between the examiner's hand and the subject's body; and (6) present estimates of intraexaminer reliability. DATA EXTRACTION: Quality assessment and data extraction were performed by 2 reviewers independently. DATA SYNTHESIS: Fifty-four studies were included, of which 26 (48%) demonstrated acceptable intraexaminer reliability. Seven high-quality studies showed acceptable reliability for flexion and extension of the elbow in healthy subjects. Conflicting results were found for shoulder external rotation and abduction. Reliability for all other movements was unacceptable. Higher estimates were reached for within-sessions reliability and if means of trials were used. CONCLUSIONS: Intraexaminer reliability of HHD in upper extremity muscle strength was acceptable only for elbow measurements in healthy subjects. We provide specific recommendations for future research. Physical therapists should not rely on HHD measurements for evaluation of treatment effects in patients with upper extremity disorders.

The CROM-VAS Test: A novel and reliable clinical test to assess immediate pain relief following treatment for movement-evoked neck pain.

BACKGROUND: The CROM-VAS Test is a novel method to quantify immediate hypoalgesic treatment effects for neck pain by measuring the reduction in pain intensity (using a VAS) at the same (sub)maximal neck position (using a CROM device) before and after treatment. It is a novel test designed to quantify immediate pain relief following treatment, without the potentially confounding effects of simultaneous improvements in function. OBJECTIVES: (1) To describe the CROM-VAS Test, (2) To assess reliability and absolute agreement of the CROM-VAS Test, and (3) To evaluate its distinctiveness by comparing it to changes in pressure pain threshold (PPT) and baseline pain scores. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: The CROM-VAS Test was assessed in 58 people with non-specific neck pain treated with cervical mobilisation and cervicothoracic manipulation. Inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC1.1)) and absolute agreement (standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change (MDC) and Bland-Altman limits of agreement (LoA)) were determined. RESULTS: Reliability was high (ICC1.1: 0.91 (95%CI: 0.85-0.95) for the CROM-VAS Test in the painful direction and 0.73 (95%CI: 0.54-0.85) in the non/least painful direction). Agreement was good (CROM-VAS Test (painful direction): SEM: 2.3 mm; MDC: 6.4 mm; LoA: 13.5 to 16.6 mm; CROM-VAS Test (non/least painful direction): SEM: 4.0 mm; MDC: 11.1 mm; LoA: 14.7 to 22.0 mm). Low or negative correlations were observed between CROM-VAS Test scores and changes in PPT and baseline neck pain scores. CONCLUSION: The CROM-VAS Test has good clinimetric properties. It measures a distinct dimension of pain relief compared to PPTs and baseline pain scores.

Measurement of clinically relevant functional health perceptions in patients with whiplash-associated disorders: the development of the whiplash specific activity and participation list (WAL).

PURPOSE: The International Classification of Human Functioning Disability and Health (ICF) provides insight into functional health status in patients with whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). In the assessment of functional limitations in patients with WAD, there are several condition-specific questionnaires available. Estimation of the true relationship between the separate constructs of the ICF is only possible if the items of the salient questionnaires measure exactly the constructs of interest, while not simultaneously measuring other constructs of the model. This study aimed to develop a condition specific and clinically relevant and usable instrument for patients with WAD that measures activity limitations and participation restrictions, as defined by the ICF framework. METHODS: Item generation consisted of (1) a semi-structured interview which was conducted among 69 WAD patients; (2) a Delphi study involving 13 health professionals experienced in the assessment of patients with WAD; (3) a literature search for items from self-assessment questionnaires for neck pain. RESULTS: A 35-item condition-specific self-assessment questionnaire for patients with WAD was developed. This new questionnaire measures purely activity limitations and participation restrictions according to the ICF and is based on patients' opinions and expert opinions. CONCLUSION: The whiplash activity and participation list tends to measure clinically relevant activity limitations and participation restrictions in WAD patients.

External validation and updating of prognostic models for predicting recovery of disability in people with (sub)acute neck pain was successful: broad external validation in a new prospective cohort.

QUESTION: Can existing post-treatment prognostic models for predicting neck pain recovery (primarily in terms of disability and secondarily in terms of pain intensity and perceived improvement) be externally validated and updated at the end of the treatment period and at 6 and 12 weeks of follow-up in a new Dutch cohort of people with neck pain treated with guideline-based usual care physiotherapy? DESIGN: External validation and model updating in a new prospective cohort of three previously developed prognostic models. PARTICIPANTS: People with (sub)acute neck pain and registered for primary care physiotherapy treatment. OUTCOME MEASURES: Recovery of disability, pain intensity, and perceived recovery at 6 and 12 weeks and at the end of the treatment period. RESULTS: Discriminative performance (c-statistic) of the disability model at 6 weeks was 0.73 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.77) and reasonably well calibrated after intercept recalibration. The disability model at 12 weeks and at the end of the treatment period showed discriminative c-statistic performance values of 0.69 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.73) and 0.68 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.72), respectively, and was well calibrated. Pain models and perceived recovery models did not reach acceptable performance. Cervical mobility added value to the disability models and pain catastrophising to the disability and pain models at 6 weeks. DISCUSSION: Broad external validation of the disability model was successful in people with (sub)acute neck pain and clinicians may use this model in clinical practice with reasonable accuracy. Further research is required to assess the disability model's clinical impact and generalisability, and to identify additional valuable model predictors. REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/a6r3k/.

Clinical characteristics differ between patients with non-traumatic neck pain, patients with whiplash-associated disorders, and pain-free individuals.

BACKGROUND: Evidence is lacking to what extent patients with Whiplash-Associated Disorders (WAD), those with non-traumatic neck pain (NTNP), and pain-free individuals differ regarding type and severity of impairments, disability, and psychological factors. OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical characteristics between patients with WAD, with NTNP, and pain-free individuals in primary care physiotherapy. Additionally, differences between patient groups for both acute and chronic symptoms were assessed. METHOD: A cross-sectional study was conducted including 168 patients with WAD, 336 matched patients with NTNP, and 336 pain-free individuals. Differences and prevalence rates were calculated for pain intensity, pain distribution, cervical range of motion, neck flexor muscle endurance, self-reported disability, and psychological factors. RESULTS: Patients with WAD had higher pain intensity (median 6/10 vs. 5/10 p<.01), had a wider distribution of their neck pain (p=.02), more restricted cervical flexion-extension (-11.9°) and rotation (-12.4°), less muscle endurance (-5.5 seconds), and more disability (+14.0%), compared to patients with NTNP. More patients with WAD reported low back pain (+9.5%) and headache (+12.2%) as musculoskeletal comorbidities. Regarding anxiety, depression, and stress, most patients (>83%) scored in the normal range. No significant differences between the patient groups were observed (p>.16). Both patient groups scored significantly worse than pain-free individuals on all characteristics. Patients with WAD and NTNP experienced different types of activity limitations and participation restrictions. CONCLUSION: WAD is a more severe condition than NTNP and should be considered a separate subgroup. A different approach in clinical practice and research is required for WAD and NTNP.

Illness perceptions as an independent predictor of chronic low back pain and pain-related disability: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether illness perceptions, measured with the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire, are an independent predictor of chronic low back pain and pain-related disability at 12 weeks. DESIGN: A prospective, observational cohort study. SETTING: 26 outpatient primary care physiotherapy practices throughout the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Acute nonspecific low back pain patients between the age of 18 and 60 years, with or without radiating pain, and a pain-free episode of at least three months before onset. INTERVENTIONS: Standard physiotherapy care according to Dutch clinical practice guidelines. OUTCOME MEASURE: Chronic low back pain defined as pain ≥3/10 on the Numeric Pain Rating Scale and as pain-related disability ≥19/70 on the Pain Disability Index measured after 12 weeks. RESULTS: Two hundred and four people with acute nonspecific low back pain completed both assessments. In the multivariable analyses, adjusted for pain intensity, disability, duration, radiating pain, depressed mood, associations of illness perceptions were OR 1.04 (95% CI: 1.01 to 1.08) for pain and 1.04 (95% CI: 0.99 to 1.09) for pain-related disability. CONCLUSIONS: Illness perceptions independently predicted chronic low back pain but not pain-related disability at 12 weeks. The added predictive value of illness perceptions was relatively low.

Concurrent validity and interrater reliability of a new smartphone application to assess 3D active cervical range of motion in patients with neck pain.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of valid, reliable, and feasible instruments for measuring planar active cervical range of motion (aCROM) and associated 3D coupling motions in patients with neck pain. Smartphones have advanced sensors and appear to be suitable for these measurements. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the concurrent validity and interrater reliability of a new iPhone application for assessing planar aCROM and associated 3D coupling motions in patients with neck pain, using an electromagnetic tracking device as a reference test. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: Two samples of neck pain patients were recruited; 30 patients for the validity study and 26 patients for the reliability study. Validity was estimated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and by calculating 95% limits of agreement (LoA). To estimate interrater reliability, ICCs were calculated. Cervical 3D coupling motions were analyzed by calculating the cross-correlation coefficients and ratio between the main motions and coupled motions for both instruments. RESULTS: ICCs for concurrent validity and interrater reliability ranged from 0.90 to 0.99. The width of the 95% LoA ranged from about 5° for right lateral bending to 11° for total rotation. No significant differences were found between both devices for associated coupling motion analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The iPhone application appears to be a useful discriminative tool for the measurement of planar aCROM and associated coupling motions in patients with neck pain. It fulfills the need for a valid, reliable, and feasible instrument in clinical practice and research. Therapists and researchers should consider measurement error when interpreting scores.

Validation of a new questionnaire to assess the impact of Whiplash Associated Disorders: The Whiplash Activity and participation List (WAL).

Valid questionnaires for measuring functional limitations in patients with Whiplash Associated Disorders (WAD) are lacking, since existing measures are not suitable for addressing the specific limitations of these patients and because of cross contamination between theoretical constructs. The objective of this study was to evaluate dimensionality, test-retest reliability, measurement error, construct validity, and responsiveness of a new condition-specific questionnaire for WAD as well as to estimate the minimally important change score. Patients with WAD grade I or II were recruited from physical therapy practices and rehabilitation centers. Dimensionality was examined by internal consistency analysis (Cronbach's alpha) and factor analysis. Test-retest reliability was estimated by intraclass correlations and measurement error was calculated by the minimal detectable change (MDC) scores. Construct validity was investigated by testing predefined hypotheses on correlations of the WAL scores with generic health measures and by using the known group method. Responsiveness was expressed as the minimal clinically important change (MCIC) score. 73 patients (53 women) were included. Cronbach's alpha was high (0.95) and unidimensionality was plausible because factor analysis showed 40.3% variance explained by one dominant factor, which was more than 4.5 times larger than the second largest factor. Test-retest reliability was excellent (0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.95). Construct validity was supported by 14 out of 15 confirmed hypotheses and the WAL showed statistically significant differences between known groups. MDC was 16 points while the MCIC was 18 points. In conclusion, the present study suggests that the WAL has adequate measurement properties, but additional research is needed.

Content validity of the Dutch version of the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE: Mechanical neck pain is a common human phenomenon. In most cases, no patho-anatomical lesion can be identified with the limitations of current radiological imaging. Therefore it is preferable to assess patients with neck pain with a focus on functioning and health, within a biopsychosocial model. The Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire aims to assess biopsychosocial aspects of neck pain. However, the content validity of the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire Dutch language version (NBQ-NL) in relation to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) is unknown. The purpose of the study was to examine the content validity of the NBQ-NL in relation to the health components of the ICF. METHOD: Content validity was assessed in relation to the ICF, by means of Discriminant Content Validity (DCV). RESULTS: The results indicate that the NBQ-NL measures four components of the five ICF (impairment, activity, participation and personal factors). CONCLUSION: The NBQ is a multidimensional questionnaire, representing four of the five components of the ICF.