• Musculoskelet Sci Pract · Jun 2018

    Review Meta Analysis

    A systematic review and meta-analysis of the reliability and validity of sensorimotor measurement instruments in people with chronic low back pain.

    • Katja Ehrenbrusthoff, Cormac G Ryan, Christian Grüneberg, and Denis J Martin.
    • Health and Social Care Institute, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, Tees Valley, TS1 3BX, United Kingdom; Hochschule für Gesundheit, Department of Applied Health Sciences, Gesundheitscampus 6-8, 44801, Bochum, Germany. Electronic address: katja.ehrenbrusthoff@hs-gesundheit.de.
    • Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2018 Jun 1; 35: 73-83.

    BackgroundDeficits in the sensorimotor system and its peripheral and central processing of the affected body part might be a contributing factor to chronic low back pain (CLBP). Hence, sensorimotor assessment is important. Valid and reliable sensorimotor measurement instruments are needed.ObjectiveTo investigate the reliability and validity of sensorimotor measurement instruments for people with chronic low back pain (CLBP).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsThe review was undertaken using the COSMIN guidelines. Databases were searched for studies investigating the clinimetric properties of sensorimotor tests in people with CLBP. The methodological study quality was rated by two independent reviewers using the COSMIN 4-point rating checklist.ResultsTen studies were included covering six sensorimotor measurement instruments with findings for reliability/measurement error, known-groups validity and convergent validity. The methodological quality ranged from poor to good, with only one study rated as good. There was insufficient evidence of enough quality to assess reliability/measurement error or convergent validity. Two-point discrimination, laterality judgement and movement control tests had moderate evidence supporting their ability to distinguish between healthy people and those with CLBP.ConclusionsTwo-point discrimination, laterality judgment and movement control tests demonstrate the greatest level of known-groups validity for people with CLBP. However, as the reliability of these measurement tools has yet to be established, this validity data should be interpreted cautiously. Further research is warranted to investigate the clinimetric properties of these sensorimotor techniques.Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…