Reliability of cervicocephalic sense of force

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 BIOPHYSICS Journal of biomechanics Pub Date : 2024-08-05 DOI:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2024.112261
{"title":"Reliability of cervicocephalic sense of force","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2024.112261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>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.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomechanics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929024003397/pdfft?md5=d9c285da6198d5e2ae7a66763fa9c315&pid=1-s2.0-S0021929024003397-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929024003397","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
颈颅力感的可靠性。
颈颅本体感觉(CCP)是对患有各种临床疾病的人进行评估的重要项目,颈颅本体感觉减弱与颈部疼痛和不平衡有关。一系列位置和运动测试的可靠性已经得到证实,但关于力感,尤其是三个运动平面的力感的数据还很有限。本研究对健康成年人(8 名男性,6 名女性,平均年龄 31.50 岁 [SD 10.14])在两次测试(间隔 4-7 天)中评估力感的可靠性进行了评估。采用力匹配协议评估绝对误差 (AE)、恒定误差 (CE) 和可变误差 (VE) 的可靠性,分别针对屈伸、侧屈和旋转的 10% 和 25% 最大自主收缩 (MVC) 目标力。参与者被绑在椅子上,以限制躯干运动,并使用固定在可调节壁座上的压缩力传感器采集数据。每种收缩类型进行六次试验,每次共进行 72 次次最大 MVC。AE(0.15-0.77)、CE(0.01-0.85)和VE(0.00-0.83)的ICC估计值各不相同,置信区间大多较宽。考虑到置信区间的下限,CE 一般具有最佳的可靠性值,但更具体地说,最可靠的收缩类型和运动是 25% MVC 弯曲(ICC 0.85,置信区间 0.54-0.95)。本研究发现,力感测试的可靠性取决于收缩、错误类型和使用的目标力。在临床人群中应用该测试测量有效性结果时,应进一步进行可靠性分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of biomechanics
Journal of biomechanics 生物-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
345
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Biomechanics publishes reports of original and substantial findings using the principles of mechanics to explore biological problems. Analytical, as well as experimental papers may be submitted, and the journal accepts original articles, surveys and perspective articles (usually by Editorial invitation only), book reviews and letters to the Editor. The criteria for acceptance of manuscripts include excellence, novelty, significance, clarity, conciseness and interest to the readership. Papers published in the journal may cover a wide range of topics in biomechanics, including, but not limited to: -Fundamental Topics - Biomechanics of the musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems, mechanics of hard and soft tissues, biofluid mechanics, mechanics of prostheses and implant-tissue interfaces, mechanics of cells. -Cardiovascular and Respiratory Biomechanics - Mechanics of blood-flow, air-flow, mechanics of the soft tissues, flow-tissue or flow-prosthesis interactions. -Cell Biomechanics - Biomechanic analyses of cells, membranes and sub-cellular structures; the relationship of the mechanical environment to cell and tissue response. -Dental Biomechanics - Design and analysis of dental tissues and prostheses, mechanics of chewing. -Functional Tissue Engineering - The role of biomechanical factors in engineered tissue replacements and regenerative medicine. -Injury Biomechanics - Mechanics of impact and trauma, dynamics of man-machine interaction. -Molecular Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of biomolecules. -Orthopedic Biomechanics - Mechanics of fracture and fracture fixation, mechanics of implants and implant fixation, mechanics of bones and joints, wear of natural and artificial joints. -Rehabilitation Biomechanics - Analyses of gait, mechanics of prosthetics and orthotics. -Sports Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of sports performance.
期刊最新文献
Intervertebral disc deformation in the lower lumbar spine during object lifting measured in vivo using indwelling bone pins. Energetic scaling behavior of patterned epithelium A clinical investigation of force plate drift error on predicted joint kinetics during gait. Strategies for unplanned gait termination at comfortable and fast walking speeds in children with cerebral palsy. Effects of foot orthoses application during walking on lower limb joint angles and moments in adults with flat Feet: A systematic review with Meta-Analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1