A pilot study investigating the use of the Orthosense Posture Monitor during a real-world moving and handling task

Validity and reliability of the Spineangel®lumbo-pelvic postural monitor

“…While direct assessment of working posture can provide precise and accurate information about postural exposure (Teschke et al 2009;Ribeiro et al 2011a), it has been argued that postural exposure outcome measures need to be assessed in a more systematic and standardised way (Vieira and Kumar 2004;Ribeiro et al 2012). A number of portable devices that provide alternatives for monitoring posture during real-life activities have recently been reported and have the potential to improve postural exposure measurements (Donatell et al 2005;Dean and Dean 2006;Horton and Abbott 2008;Teschke et al 2009;O'Sullivan et al 2011). From a clinical perspective, the ideal instrument should be capable of monitoring posture while also providing postural feedback for the user (Ribeiro et al 2011c).…”

The between-day and inter-rater reliability of a novel wireless system to analyse lumbar spine posture

“…In recent years a number of devices have been developed to analyse spinal posture outside the laboratory (Donatell et al 2005, Dean and Dean 2006, Horton and Abbott 2008. Spinal posture analysis is now possible using accelerometers (Bazzarelli et al 2001, Nevins et al 2002, Wong and Wong 2008, gyroscopes (Lee et al 2003), strain gauges and/or optical sensors (Donatell et al 2005, Dean andDean 2006) and even sensing fabrics (de Rossi et al 2003, Walsh et al 2006. Recent reviews have highlighted that, despite the potential of such devices, there is a lack of empirical data supporting their use (Wong et al 2007, Hermens andVollenbroek-Hutton 2008).…”

“…Unfortunately, some of the devices are relatively large and invasive, such that they cannot be concealed easily (Donatell et al 2005, Magnusson et al 2008 or only used under supervision (Magnusson et al 2008). While some of these devices have at least some evidence of initial reliability and/or validity studies being completed (Donatell et al 2005, Intolo et al 2010, this is not the case with all devices (Dean and Dean 2006, Magnusson et al 2008, Mork and Westgaard 2009. It is critical that the desire to promptly use these devices in clinical trials is balanced against the requirement to initially establish the scientific robustness of the device itself.…”

Validation of a novel spinal posture monitor: comparison with digital videofluoroscopy

“…Several portable, minimally invasive methods of analysing posture in ''real-world'' settings have recently been developed. Spinal posture analysis is now possible using devices based on accelerometers [10], inclinometers [11], gyroscopes [12], fibre-optics [13], strain gauges and/or optical sensors [14,15] and ultrasound [16]. Despite their potential, some devices are relatively large and cannot be concealed easily [14], or can only be used under supervision [17].…”

“…Despite their potential, some devices are relatively large and cannot be concealed easily [14], or can only be used under supervision [17]. While the reliability and/or validity of some of these devices has been investigated [10,14,16], this is not the case with all devices [11,15,17]. Other devices can provide a snapshot of static spinal posture, but cannot analyse dynamic posture or provide postural feedback [18,19].…”