{"title":"Intra- and inter-rater reliability of goniometric finger range of motion using a written protocol.","authors":"Takuya Nakai, Satoru Amano, Chikako Murao, Haruki Taguchi, Kayoko Takahashi","doi":"10.33393/aop.2024.3049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Goniometric finger range of motion (ROM) is the most common outcome measure used for functional evaluation of finger joints, but its reliability is not well-evaluated. This study aimed to investigate intra- and inter-rater reliability of goniometric finger ROM using a written protocol for active, passive, and composite movements in healthy adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The design was a single-center, cross-sectional, reliability study. Participants were 20 healthy adults (mean ± standard deviation, 36.4 ± 10.9 years). ROM for active, passive, and composite movements of the fingers was assessed by three occupational therapists with at least 5 years clinical experience in the field of physical disabilities. To standardize the measurement method used, we developed a written protocol, stabilized the wrist position, and trained the evaluators. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values were used for the reliability analysis. ICC (1,1) was used for intra-rater reliability. ICC (2,1) was used for inter-rater reliability. Hand-shaped heatmaps were used to summarize the reliability data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most of the results (88.7%) showed moderate to good intra-rater reliability (ICC ≥ 0.50), while inter-rater reliability showed less (69.0%). Both intra- and inter-rater reliability showed no trends between dominant and non-dominant hands, type of movement, finger, or joint.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Intra-rater reliability was relatively high and using a written protocol was beneficial. Inter-rater reliability tended to be lower, and differences in the physical structure of both raters and participants may have affected inter-rater reliability values.</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"14 ","pages":"83-88"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11463044/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of physiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33393/aop.2024.3049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Goniometric finger range of motion (ROM) is the most common outcome measure used for functional evaluation of finger joints, but its reliability is not well-evaluated. This study aimed to investigate intra- and inter-rater reliability of goniometric finger ROM using a written protocol for active, passive, and composite movements in healthy adults.
Methods: The design was a single-center, cross-sectional, reliability study. Participants were 20 healthy adults (mean ± standard deviation, 36.4 ± 10.9 years). ROM for active, passive, and composite movements of the fingers was assessed by three occupational therapists with at least 5 years clinical experience in the field of physical disabilities. To standardize the measurement method used, we developed a written protocol, stabilized the wrist position, and trained the evaluators. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values were used for the reliability analysis. ICC (1,1) was used for intra-rater reliability. ICC (2,1) was used for inter-rater reliability. Hand-shaped heatmaps were used to summarize the reliability data.
Results: Most of the results (88.7%) showed moderate to good intra-rater reliability (ICC ≥ 0.50), while inter-rater reliability showed less (69.0%). Both intra- and inter-rater reliability showed no trends between dominant and non-dominant hands, type of movement, finger, or joint.
Conclusions: Intra-rater reliability was relatively high and using a written protocol was beneficial. Inter-rater reliability tended to be lower, and differences in the physical structure of both raters and participants may have affected inter-rater reliability values.