Intra- and inter-rater reliability of goniometric finger range of motion using a written protocol.

IF 2.1 Q1 REHABILITATION Archives of physiotherapy Pub Date : 2024-10-08 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.33393/aop.2024.3049
Takuya Nakai, Satoru Amano, Chikako Murao, Haruki Taguchi, Kayoko Takahashi
{"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":null,"pages":null},"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.

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
使用书面协议测量手指关节活动范围的内部和评定者之间的可靠性。
简介手指动态关节角度测量(ROM)是手指关节功能评估中最常用的结果测量方法,但其可靠性还没有得到很好的评估。本研究旨在调查健康成年人使用书面协议进行主动、被动和复合运动时测角手指运动幅度的评分者内部和评分者之间的可靠性:研究设计为单中心、横断面、可靠性研究。研究对象为 20 名健康成年人(平均年龄为 36.4±10.9 岁)。手指主动、被动和复合运动的 ROM 由三名在肢体残疾领域至少有 5 年临床经验的职业治疗师进行评估。为使测量方法标准化,我们制定了书面方案,稳定了手腕位置,并对评估人员进行了培训。可靠性分析采用了类内相关系数(ICC)值。ICC (1,1)用于评价者内部的可靠性。ICC (2,1) 用于评价者之间的可靠性。手形热图用于总结信度数据:大多数结果(88.7%)显示出中等至良好的评分者内部信度(ICC ≥ 0.50),而评分者之间的信度较低(69.0%)。评分者内部和评分者之间的信度在惯用手和非惯用手、运动类型、手指或关节之间均无趋势:评分者内部信度相对较高,使用书面协议是有益的。评分者之间的信度往往较低,评分者和参与者身体结构的差异可能会影响评分者之间的信度值。
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
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Indoor and outdoor 10-Meter Walk Test and Timed Up and Go in patients after total hip arthroplasty: a reliability and comparative study. Erratum in: Pragmatism in manual therapy trials for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review. Intra- and inter-rater reliability of goniometric finger range of motion using a written protocol. A decade of growth: preserving the original meaning of research for physiotherapists. Neurological conditions and community-based physical activity: physical therapists' belief and actions.
×
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