颈椎活动范围测量方法的可靠性比较:通用测角仪与虚拟现实

C. P.
{"title":"颈椎活动范围测量方法的可靠性比较:通用测角仪与虚拟现实","authors":"C. P.","doi":"10.26420/physmedrehabilint.2022.1195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this research study is to compare the reliability of measuring active cervical range of motion performed with the universal goniometer with an FDA approved XRHealth virtual reality computer program and the Oculus Rift. Methods: The design of the study is a single-blinded randomized controlled study. A sample size of 40 adults was recruited via email, posters, and person to person recruitment. The sample was comprised of males and females, ages 20 to 72-year-old. Equipment included a large universal goniometer with 12-inch arms and a covered full circle plastic body, oculus rift with a computer, VR Health System, chair with arms and a gait belt to control for trunk movements. All four investigators underwent a training session in the measurement of cervical range of motion utilizing a universal goniometer. Each participant was measured with each tool twice. Results: Virtual reality demonstrated a statistically significant difference from the standard goniometer methods at a 99% confidence level (p=0.01). Both tools (goniometer and virtual reality) were found to have good to excellent inter-rater reliability. Conclusion: This study suggests a virtual reality method can be used as a reliable clinical tool in comparison with the universal goniometric cervical active range of motion measurement. Recommendations for future studies should be focused on establishing the validity of virtual reality as an assessment tool using a larger sample size with a wide age range and those who have current cervical discomfort or are experiencing functional limitations in cervical ranges of motion.","PeriodicalId":90945,"journal":{"name":"Physical medicine and rehabilitation international","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reliability Comparisons of Cervical Active Range of Motion Measuring Methods: Universal Goniometer versus Virtual Reality\",\"authors\":\"C. P.\",\"doi\":\"10.26420/physmedrehabilint.2022.1195\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The purpose of this research study is to compare the reliability of measuring active cervical range of motion performed with the universal goniometer with an FDA approved XRHealth virtual reality computer program and the Oculus Rift. Methods: The design of the study is a single-blinded randomized controlled study. A sample size of 40 adults was recruited via email, posters, and person to person recruitment. The sample was comprised of males and females, ages 20 to 72-year-old. Equipment included a large universal goniometer with 12-inch arms and a covered full circle plastic body, oculus rift with a computer, VR Health System, chair with arms and a gait belt to control for trunk movements. All four investigators underwent a training session in the measurement of cervical range of motion utilizing a universal goniometer. Each participant was measured with each tool twice. Results: Virtual reality demonstrated a statistically significant difference from the standard goniometer methods at a 99% confidence level (p=0.01). Both tools (goniometer and virtual reality) were found to have good to excellent inter-rater reliability. Conclusion: This study suggests a virtual reality method can be used as a reliable clinical tool in comparison with the universal goniometric cervical active range of motion measurement. Recommendations for future studies should be focused on establishing the validity of virtual reality as an assessment tool using a larger sample size with a wide age range and those who have current cervical discomfort or are experiencing functional limitations in cervical ranges of motion.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physical medicine and rehabilitation international\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physical medicine and rehabilitation international\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26420/physmedrehabilint.2022.1195\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical medicine and rehabilitation international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26420/physmedrehabilint.2022.1195","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是比较用通用测角仪、美国食品药品监督管理局批准的XRHealth虚拟现实计算机程序和Oculus Rift测量活动颈椎活动范围的可靠性。方法:本研究为单盲随机对照研究。通过电子邮件、海报和面对面招聘的方式招募了40名成年人。样本由20至72岁的男性和女性组成。设备包括一个带12英寸手臂和一个覆盖的圆形塑料身体的大型通用测角仪、带电脑的眼球裂孔、VR健康系统、带手臂的椅子和控制躯干运动的步态带。所有四名研究人员都接受了使用通用角度计测量颈椎活动范围的培训。每个参与者用每种工具测量两次。结果:在99%的置信水平下,虚拟现实与标准测角仪方法有统计学上的显著差异(p=0.01)。两种工具(测角仪和虚拟现实)都具有良好的评分者间可靠性。结论:本研究表明,虚拟现实方法可以作为一种可靠的临床工具,与通用角度测量颈椎活动范围相比较。未来研究的建议应侧重于确定虚拟现实作为一种评估工具的有效性,使用较大的样本量、较宽的年龄范围以及那些目前有宫颈不适或宫颈活动范围功能受限的人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Reliability Comparisons of Cervical Active Range of Motion Measuring Methods: Universal Goniometer versus Virtual Reality
The purpose of this research study is to compare the reliability of measuring active cervical range of motion performed with the universal goniometer with an FDA approved XRHealth virtual reality computer program and the Oculus Rift. Methods: The design of the study is a single-blinded randomized controlled study. A sample size of 40 adults was recruited via email, posters, and person to person recruitment. The sample was comprised of males and females, ages 20 to 72-year-old. Equipment included a large universal goniometer with 12-inch arms and a covered full circle plastic body, oculus rift with a computer, VR Health System, chair with arms and a gait belt to control for trunk movements. All four investigators underwent a training session in the measurement of cervical range of motion utilizing a universal goniometer. Each participant was measured with each tool twice. Results: Virtual reality demonstrated a statistically significant difference from the standard goniometer methods at a 99% confidence level (p=0.01). Both tools (goniometer and virtual reality) were found to have good to excellent inter-rater reliability. Conclusion: This study suggests a virtual reality method can be used as a reliable clinical tool in comparison with the universal goniometric cervical active range of motion measurement. Recommendations for future studies should be focused on establishing the validity of virtual reality as an assessment tool using a larger sample size with a wide age range and those who have current cervical discomfort or are experiencing functional limitations in cervical ranges of motion.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Study of Red Ginseng Preparation HRG80 for Relieving Muscle Pain/Soreness and Supporting the Neuromuscular Performance of Elite Weightlifters in Intense Resistance Exercise: An Open-Label, Randomized, Crossover Trial Decannulation Timing is an Expression of Neurological Recovery Time: The Need to Define a Performance within a Time Frame Vincer EMO Project: Physical Activity for Haemophilic Patients. How We Faced Up SARS COV2 Pandemic Risk Assessment System of Fall in the Elderly Using Artificial Intelligence and Cloud Computing Short Wave Diathermy (SWD) Therapy in Patients with Adhesive Capsulitis of Shoulder
×
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