首页> 外文期刊>Spine >Meta-analysis of normative cervical motion.
【24h】

Meta-analysis of normative cervical motion.

机译:规范宫颈运动的荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis of normative cervical range of motion literature performed by applying summary statistics to range of motion and reliability values reported among studies. OBJECTIVES: To identify reliable and valid methods for measuring active and passive cervical range of motion and to estimate normative values. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Range of motion studies use a variety of measuring instruments and statistical analyses, making it difficult to select the most suitable instruments, procedures, and normative values for clinical application. Reviews of the literature, being limited in scope, have not quantitatively synthesized the literature. METHODS: Range of motion and reliability data were grouped by technology and types of motion, then summarized by deriving means and variabilities. Clinical validity was assessed by examining discrepancies, variabilities, and correlations. Change in range of motion as a function of age was determined by comparing range of motion ratios (fourth:third and seventh:third decades). RESULTS: Nine technologies were identified. Overall, passive motion was greater than active motion, and range of motion decreased as age increased, with women exhibiting greater range of motion than men. Variations within each technology were as large as or larger than those between technologies, indicating that clinical procedures are as important as the accuracy and precision of the technology itself. Reliability has not been adequately tested for the majority of technologies. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical procedures appear to be as important as accuracy and precision in determining the reported range of motion values. Further research is needed to establish a gold standard for normative values and to identify an instrument that is reliable for all motions.
机译:研究设计:通过对研究中报告的运动范围和可靠性值进行汇总统计,对规范性宫颈运动范围文献进行荟萃分析。目的:确定测量主动和被动宫颈运动范围的可靠和有效方法,并评估标准值。背景数据摘要:运动研究范围使用各种测量仪器和统计分析,因此很难为临床应用选择最合适的仪器,程序和标准值。文献综述由于范围有限,尚未对文献进行定量合成。方法:根据技术和运动类型对运动范围和可靠性数据进行分组,然后通过推导均值和变异性进行总结。通过检查差异,变异性和相关性来评估临床有效性。通过比较运动比例的范围(第四,第三和第七:第三十年)确定运动范围随年龄的变化。结果:确定了九种技术。总体而言,被动运动大于主动运动,并且随着年龄的增长,运动范围减小,女性的运动范围大于男性。每种技术内的差异与技术间的差异一样大或更大,这表明临床程序与技术本身的准确性和精确性一样重要。可靠性尚未针对大多数技术进行充分测试。结论:在确定所报告的运动值范围时,临床程序似乎与准确性和精确性一样重要。需要进一步研究以建立规范值的黄金标准,并确定对所有运动可靠的工具。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号