Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25432070›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2014

Reliability of movement control tests on the cervical spine.

Maja Patroncini, Susanne Hannig, André Meichtry, Hannu Luomajoki

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06189612 (Is the Combination of Manual Therapy and Movement Control Exercises More Effective Than Manual Therapy and Standard Exercises in a Population of Patients With Chronic Neck Pain to Reduce Neck Disability? A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06189612 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Is the Combination of Manual Therapy and Movement Control Exercises More Effective Than Manual Therapy and Standard Exercises in a Population of Patients With Chronic Neck Pain to Reduce Neck Disability? A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorHochschule OsnabruckRan2023 to 2024Enrolled45ConditionsNeck Pain, Temporomandibular DisorderArmsClinical reasoning based physiotherapy + cervical movement control training, Clinical reasoning based physiotherapy + orofacial movement control training, Clinical reasoning based physiotherapy + standard exercises
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Maja Patroncini
Susanne Hannig
André Meichtry
Hannu LuomajokiZurich University of Applied Sciences, School of health professions, Institute of Physiotherapy, Technikumstrasse 70, 8400 Winterthur, Switzerland. luom@zhaw.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMovement control impairment reduces active control of movement. Patients with this might form an important subgroup among patients with mechanical cervical pain. Diagnosis is based on the observation of active movement tests. Although widely used clinically, few studies have been performed to determine the reliability of a test battery. The aim of this study was to determine the inter-tester reliability of movement control impairment [MCI] tests on the cervical spine.

methodsForty-five subjects (31 patients with neck pain, 14 healthy controls) were videotaped while performing a standardized test battery consisting of 13 tests of active movement control. Using observation, two experienced physiotherapists independently rated test performances as correct or incorrect. One of them was blinded to all other patient information and both to each other. Kappa coefficients and 95% confidence intervals [CI] for inter-tester results were calculated.

resultsThe kappa values for inter-tester reliability ranged in from 0.47-1.0 of the 13 tests, 2 demonstrated perfect reliability (k = 1.0), 4 excellent (k 0.81-0.99), 6 substantial (k 0.61-0.8) and 1 good (k 0.41-0.6).

conclusionsThe physiotherapists were able reliably rate the majority the tests in this series of motor control tasks. There have been studies performed describing the assessment and treatment of movement control impairment problems and low back pain. However, no study has involved the assessment of the cervical dysfunction subgroup. This study presents a reliable test battery, for clinical use, to perform more specific examination of this subgroup.

Indexed as

AdultCervical VertebraeFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMovementNeck PainPain MeasurementReproducibility of ResultsSingle-Blind Method

Identifiers

PMID25432070
PMCPMC4506480

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.