Elsevier

Manual Therapy

Volume 1, Issue 1, November 1995, Pages 36-42
Manual Therapy

Original article
Reliability and concurrent validity of two instruments for measuring cervical range of motion: effects of age and gender

https://doi.org/10.1054/math.1995.0248Get rights and content

Abstract

SUMMARY. This study set out to determine the reliability and concurrent validity of two instruments for measuring cervical range of motion and, using these instruments, to establish age and gender effects on cervical mobility. 84 asymptomatic subjects were investigated for age and gender effects on cervical range of motion using the CROM and single inclinometer. Thirty of these subjects also took part in the reliability study. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for inter- and intra-examiner reliability of the CROM were 0.88 and 0.96 (flexion/extension), 0.84 and 0.96 (lateral flexion) and 0.92 and 0.92 (rotation) respectively. Corresponding values for the inclinometer were 0.84 and 0.94; 0.82 and 0.92; and 0.81 and 0.89. Reliability of the CROM and single inclinometer was thus supported. Concurrent validity of the two instruments was supported for flexion/extension (0.80) and lateral flexion (0.79) but not for rotation (–0.18). Using both measuring devices, cervical mobility decreased with age in all planes of motion (p < 0.0001) but was not significantly affected by gender. Based on our findings, reassessment of normative values of cervical range of motion is indicated taking age, but not gender, into account.

References (0)

Cited by (120)

  • Normative cervical spine kinematics of a circumduction task

    2021, Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology
  • Normative values of cervical range of motion for both children and adults: A systematic review

    2020, Musculoskeletal Science and Practice
    Citation Excerpt :

    The CROM device has been reported to be both reliable and valid in several systematic reviews (de Koning et al., 2008; Williams et al., 2010). The CROM device was the most commonly used device (n = 12) to determine normative values (Hole et al., 1995; Swinkels and Swinkels-Meewisse, 2014; Arbogast et al., 2007; Chi et al., 2005; Davies et al., 2016; Hamilton and Gatherer, 2014; Hamilton et al., 2014; Lynch-Caris et al., 2008; Nyland and Johnson, 2004; Schenkman et al., 1996; Smith et al., 2016; Youdas et al., 1992). Most studies were rated as low RoB studies (Hole et al., 1995; Swinkels and Swinkels-Meewisse, 2014; Arbogast et al., 2007; Chi et al., 2005; Davies et al., 2016; Lynch-Caris et al., 2008; Nyland and Johnson, 2004; Smith et al., 2016; Youdas et al., 1992).

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text