Clinical Biomechanics
Volume 15, Issue 9 , Pages 658-664 , November 2000

Reproducibility and instrument validity of a new ultrasonography-based system for measuring cervical spine kinematics

Received 16 December 1999 ,Accepted 13 June 2000.

References 

  1. Youdas JW, Garrett TR, Suman VJ, Boggard CL, Hallman HO, Carey JR. Normal range of motion of the cervical spine: an initial goniometric study. Phys Ther. 1992;72:770–780
  2. Trott PH, Pearcy MJ, Ruston SA, Fulton I, Brien C. Three-dimensional analysis of active cervical motion: the effect of age and gender. Clin Biomech. 1996;11:201–206
  3. Dvorak J, Antinnes JA, Panjabi M, Loustalot D, Bonomo M. Age and gender related normal motion of the cervical spine. Spine. 1992;17:S393–S398
  4. Alaranta H, Hurri H, Heliovaara M, Soukka A, Harju R. Flexibility of the spine: normative values of goniometric and tape measurements. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1994;26:147–154
  5. Feipel V, Rondelet B, Le J-P, Pellac M. Normal global motion of the cervical spine: an electrogoniometric study. Clin Biomech. 1999;14:462–470
  6. Kuhlman KA. Cervical range of motion in the elderly. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74:1071–1079
  7. Youdas JW, Carey JR, Garrett TR. Reliability of measurements of cervical spine range of motion – comparison of three methods. Phys Ther. 1991;71:98–106
  8. Lantz CA, Chen J, Buch D. Clinical validity and stability of active and passive cervical range of motion with regard to total and unilateral uniplanar motion. Spine. 1999;24:1082–1089
  9. Ålund M, Larsson SE. Three dimensional analysis of neck motion: a clinical method. Spine. 1990;15:87–91
  10. Schreiber T. Assessment of whiplash-associated disorders using an ultrasound-based 3-D motion analysis system. In: Proceedings of the First World Congress on Whiplash-Associated Disorders, Vancouver, 1999. p. 144
  11. Mayer T, Brady S, Bovasso E, Pope P, Gatchel RJ. Noninvasive measurement of cervical tri-planar motion in normal subjects. Spine. 1993;18:2191–2195
  12. Castro WHM, Sautmann A, Schilgen M, Sautmann M. Noninvasive three-dimensional analysis of cervical spine motion in normal subjects in relation to age and sex. Spine. 2000;25:443–449
  13. Gajdosik RL, Bohannon RW. Clinical measurements of range of motion: Reviw of goniometry emphasizing reliability and validity. Phys Ther. 1987;67:1867–1872
  14. Keating JL, Matyas TA. Unpredictable error in dynamometry measurements: a quantitative analysis of the literature. Isokinet Exer Sci. 1998;7:107–121
  15. Revel M, Andre-Deshays C, Minguet M. Cervicocephalic kinesthetic sensibility in patients with cervical pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1991;72:288–291
  16. Heikkilä HV, Wenngren B-I. Cervicocephalic kinesthetic sensibility, active range of cervical motion aqnd oculomotor function in patients with whiplash injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998;79:1089–1094
  17. Caillliet R. Neck and arm pain, 3rd ed, Philadelphia, FA: Davis, 1982
  18. Marras WS, Wongsam PE. Flexibility and velocity of the normal and impaired lumbar spine. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1986;67:213–217

PII: S0268-0033(00)00033-4

Clinical Biomechanics
Volume 15, Issue 9 , Pages 658-664 , November 2000

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution