2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.math.2008.01.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reliability of assisted indentation in measuring lumbar spinal stiffness

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
34
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
1
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These values are comparable to reliability of other methods of stiffness calculation presented in the literature demonstrating ICCs ranging from .88 to .96. 15,16 The extremely low SEMs, ranging from 5.6% to 12.6% of the mean stiffness values, demonstrate excellent precision of the measurement when compared across trials. This is comparable to other methods presented in the literature that demonstrated SEMs ranging from 5.7% to 8.0% of the mean stiffness values.…”
Section: Reliability Analysismentioning
confidence: 87%
“…These values are comparable to reliability of other methods of stiffness calculation presented in the literature demonstrating ICCs ranging from .88 to .96. 15,16 The extremely low SEMs, ranging from 5.6% to 12.6% of the mean stiffness values, demonstrate excellent precision of the measurement when compared across trials. This is comparable to other methods presented in the literature that demonstrated SEMs ranging from 5.7% to 8.0% of the mean stiffness values.…”
Section: Reliability Analysismentioning
confidence: 87%
“…However, neither data for normal stiffness value nor a standard method of measuring spinal stiffness has been reported and accepted by most clinicians. There have been technical advances reporting devices to measure PA stiffness (Lee and Svensson, 1990;Lee and Evans, 1992;Latimer et al, 1996;Edmondston et al, 1998;Stanton and Kawchuk, 2009;Latimer et al, 1998;Latimer et al, 1996). Recent advance in PA stiffness measuring device has been reported by .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the contrary Latimer et al (1996) used their device for stiffness measurement on an unpadded testing bed. Though not specifically mentioned by Caling and Lee (2001) it would appear from their illustration that their subjects lay on a rigid surface, and Stanton and Kawchuk (2009) do not indicate if they used plinth for their subjects when testing for stiffness. Reconciling these two factors it was decided to use a standard clinical plinth used in most clinical facilities (Make: Hill Adjustable).…”
Section: Paddingmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Although spinal stiffness has been quantified in vivo in numerous studies using the applied force to displacement relationship (Colloca and Keller, 2004;Hodges et al, 2005;Owens et al, 2007b;Stanton and Kawchuk, 2009), there are some reports that question whether a linear measurement of stiffness is adequate as stiffness is potentially a multidimensional construct (Marcotte et al, 2005;Nicholson et al, 2001). It is possible that more complex methods may be needed to detect all the clinically relevant components of spinal stiffness.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%