{"title":"Reliability of cervicocephalic sense of force","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2024.112261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Cervicocephalic proprioception (CCP) is an important assessment item for people with a range of clinical conditions, where reduced CCP is associated with neck pain and imbalance. Reliability has been established for a range of positional and movements tests, but there is limited data regarding sense of force, particularly across three planes of movement. The current test–retest study assessed reliability when evaluating sense of force in healthy adults (8 males, 6 females, mean age 31.50 years [SD 10.14]) over two sessions, 4–7 days apart. A force matching protocol was used to evaluate reliability of absolute error (AE), constant error (CE), and variable error (VE) for 10 % and 25 % maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) target forces for flexion, extension, lateral flexion, and rotation. Participants were strapped to a chair to limit trunk movement and data was captured using a compressive force transducer fixed to an adjustable wall mount. Six trials were performed for each contraction-type, totaling 72 submaximal MVCs per session. ICC estimates for AE (0.15–0.77), CE (0.01–0.85), and VE (0.00–0.83) were varied and confidence intervals were mostly wide. Considering lower limits of confidence intervals, CE had best reliability values generally, but more specifically the most reliable contraction type and movement was 25 % MVC flexion (ICC 0.85, confidence interval 0.54–0.95). This study found that reliability for sense of force testing was dependent upon contraction, type of error, and target force utilized. Further reliability analysis should be performed when applying this test to measure validity outcomes in clinical populations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomechanics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929024003397/pdfft?md5=d9c285da6198d5e2ae7a66763fa9c315&pid=1-s2.0-S0021929024003397-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929024003397","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Cervicocephalic proprioception (CCP) is an important assessment item for people with a range of clinical conditions, where reduced CCP is associated with neck pain and imbalance. Reliability has been established for a range of positional and movements tests, but there is limited data regarding sense of force, particularly across three planes of movement. The current test–retest study assessed reliability when evaluating sense of force in healthy adults (8 males, 6 females, mean age 31.50 years [SD 10.14]) over two sessions, 4–7 days apart. A force matching protocol was used to evaluate reliability of absolute error (AE), constant error (CE), and variable error (VE) for 10 % and 25 % maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) target forces for flexion, extension, lateral flexion, and rotation. Participants were strapped to a chair to limit trunk movement and data was captured using a compressive force transducer fixed to an adjustable wall mount. Six trials were performed for each contraction-type, totaling 72 submaximal MVCs per session. ICC estimates for AE (0.15–0.77), CE (0.01–0.85), and VE (0.00–0.83) were varied and confidence intervals were mostly wide. Considering lower limits of confidence intervals, CE had best reliability values generally, but more specifically the most reliable contraction type and movement was 25 % MVC flexion (ICC 0.85, confidence interval 0.54–0.95). This study found that reliability for sense of force testing was dependent upon contraction, type of error, and target force utilized. Further reliability analysis should be performed when applying this test to measure validity outcomes in clinical populations.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Biomechanics publishes reports of original and substantial findings using the principles of mechanics to explore biological problems. Analytical, as well as experimental papers may be submitted, and the journal accepts original articles, surveys and perspective articles (usually by Editorial invitation only), book reviews and letters to the Editor. The criteria for acceptance of manuscripts include excellence, novelty, significance, clarity, conciseness and interest to the readership.
Papers published in the journal may cover a wide range of topics in biomechanics, including, but not limited to:
-Fundamental Topics - Biomechanics of the musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems, mechanics of hard and soft tissues, biofluid mechanics, mechanics of prostheses and implant-tissue interfaces, mechanics of cells.
-Cardiovascular and Respiratory Biomechanics - Mechanics of blood-flow, air-flow, mechanics of the soft tissues, flow-tissue or flow-prosthesis interactions.
-Cell Biomechanics - Biomechanic analyses of cells, membranes and sub-cellular structures; the relationship of the mechanical environment to cell and tissue response.
-Dental Biomechanics - Design and analysis of dental tissues and prostheses, mechanics of chewing.
-Functional Tissue Engineering - The role of biomechanical factors in engineered tissue replacements and regenerative medicine.
-Injury Biomechanics - Mechanics of impact and trauma, dynamics of man-machine interaction.
-Molecular Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of biomolecules.
-Orthopedic Biomechanics - Mechanics of fracture and fracture fixation, mechanics of implants and implant fixation, mechanics of bones and joints, wear of natural and artificial joints.
-Rehabilitation Biomechanics - Analyses of gait, mechanics of prosthetics and orthotics.
-Sports Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of sports performance.