Pelvic tilt in sitting: Do you see what I see? (Maybe not)

Examination of pelvic tilt movements are utilised across many fields of physiotherapy. It is important for physiotherapists to establish a clinically helpful, time-efficient test assessing pelvic tilt, reliable within and across multiple assessors. Elgueta-Cancino et al. (2014) described such a test...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:New Zealand journal of physiotherapy 2023-03, Vol.51 (1), p.48-52
Hauptverfasser: Bagg, Matthew, Skinner, Ian, Moloney, Niamh, Lock, Martin, McAuley, James, Rabey, Martin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 52
container_issue 1
container_start_page 48
container_title New Zealand journal of physiotherapy
container_volume 51
creator Bagg, Matthew
Skinner, Ian
Moloney, Niamh
Lock, Martin
McAuley, James
Rabey, Martin
description Examination of pelvic tilt movements are utilised across many fields of physiotherapy. It is important for physiotherapists to establish a clinically helpful, time-efficient test assessing pelvic tilt, reliable within and across multiple assessors. Elgueta-Cancino et al. (2014) described such a test; however, their methodology reduced clinical applicability and revealed limitations regarding examination of test reliability. This study aimed to independently evaluate the reliability of a clinical test of pelvic tilt. Twenty-three participants with chronic low back pain completed the test following standardised instructions and demonstration by one assessor. Participants tilted the pelvis forwards and backwards 10 times in sitting. The test was simultaneously scored on the scale originally described by three blinded assessors. Participants repeated the test one-week later. Inter-assessor reliability was determined using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 2,1), with a resulting value of 0.52, 95% confidence interval [0.35-0.68]; and a standard error of measurement SEM (with a resulting value of 1.28). The following SEM values were found for intra-assessor agreement: Assessor 1 =1.52, assessor 2 =1.47, and assessor 3 = 1.19. These findings suggest the inter- and intra-assessor reliability of a clinical test of pelvic tilting has insufficient reliability to distinguish between participants across multiple assessors. An observed change of at least 1.5 points may be necessary to be confident true change in test performance has occurred. Key Words: Low Back Pain, Movement Control, Reliability
doi_str_mv 10.15619/NZJP/51.1.06
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2804255347</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A744351938</galeid><sourcerecordid>A744351938</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2736-9c58056d92a3d7495ba2f3b08f8aa06b18b7dabbf84ca2d6b6b906cd84b237913</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkctLAzEQxoMoWKtH7wFB9LA1j81jvUipb-rjoBcvIclmbWS7qZus0v_erQoqyBxmGH7ffAwfALsYjTDjuDi6fbq-P2J4hEeIr4EBIRRluZR8HQwQRTQTuKCbYCvGF4SoYEQMwPG9q9-8hcnXCfoGRp-Sb56P4WmAy9DB6Bx8n-kEr1bjCTy40UvjYBPS4TbYqHQd3c53H4LH87OHyWU2vbu4moynmSWC8qywTCLGy4JoWoq8YEaTihokK6k14gZLI0ptTCVzq0nJDTcF4raUuSFUFJgOwd7X3UUbXjsXk3oJXdv0lopIlBPGaC5-qGddO-WbKqRW27mPVo1FnlPW_y57avQP1Vfp5t6GxlW-3_8R7P8SzJyu0yyGuks-NPEvmH2Btg0xtq5Si9bPdbtUGKnPeNQqHsWwwgpx-gHz_32N</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2804255347</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Pelvic tilt in sitting: Do you see what I see? (Maybe not)</title><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Bagg, Matthew ; Skinner, Ian ; Moloney, Niamh ; Lock, Martin ; McAuley, James ; Rabey, Martin</creator><creatorcontrib>Bagg, Matthew ; Skinner, Ian ; Moloney, Niamh ; Lock, Martin ; McAuley, James ; Rabey, Martin</creatorcontrib><description>Examination of pelvic tilt movements are utilised across many fields of physiotherapy. It is important for physiotherapists to establish a clinically helpful, time-efficient test assessing pelvic tilt, reliable within and across multiple assessors. Elgueta-Cancino et al. (2014) described such a test; however, their methodology reduced clinical applicability and revealed limitations regarding examination of test reliability. This study aimed to independently evaluate the reliability of a clinical test of pelvic tilt. Twenty-three participants with chronic low back pain completed the test following standardised instructions and demonstration by one assessor. Participants tilted the pelvis forwards and backwards 10 times in sitting. The test was simultaneously scored on the scale originally described by three blinded assessors. Participants repeated the test one-week later. Inter-assessor reliability was determined using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 2,1), with a resulting value of 0.52, 95% confidence interval [0.35-0.68]; and a standard error of measurement SEM (with a resulting value of 1.28). The following SEM values were found for intra-assessor agreement: Assessor 1 =1.52, assessor 2 =1.47, and assessor 3 = 1.19. These findings suggest the inter- and intra-assessor reliability of a clinical test of pelvic tilting has insufficient reliability to distinguish between participants across multiple assessors. An observed change of at least 1.5 points may be necessary to be confident true change in test performance has occurred. Key Words: Low Back Pain, Movement Control, Reliability</description><identifier>ISSN: 0303-7193</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2230-4886</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.15619/NZJP/51.1.06</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Wellington: New Zealand Society of Physiotherapists</publisher><subject>Agreements ; Back pain ; Chronic pain ; Confidence intervals ; Diagnosis ; Low back pain ; Pelvis ; Physical therapy ; Standard error of measurement ; Values</subject><ispartof>New Zealand journal of physiotherapy, 2023-03, Vol.51 (1), p.48-52</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2023 New Zealand Society of Physiotherapists</rights><rights>Copyright New Zealand Society of Physiotherapists Mar 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bagg, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Skinner, Ian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moloney, Niamh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lock, Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McAuley, James</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rabey, Martin</creatorcontrib><title>Pelvic tilt in sitting: Do you see what I see? (Maybe not)</title><title>New Zealand journal of physiotherapy</title><description>Examination of pelvic tilt movements are utilised across many fields of physiotherapy. It is important for physiotherapists to establish a clinically helpful, time-efficient test assessing pelvic tilt, reliable within and across multiple assessors. Elgueta-Cancino et al. (2014) described such a test; however, their methodology reduced clinical applicability and revealed limitations regarding examination of test reliability. This study aimed to independently evaluate the reliability of a clinical test of pelvic tilt. Twenty-three participants with chronic low back pain completed the test following standardised instructions and demonstration by one assessor. Participants tilted the pelvis forwards and backwards 10 times in sitting. The test was simultaneously scored on the scale originally described by three blinded assessors. Participants repeated the test one-week later. Inter-assessor reliability was determined using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 2,1), with a resulting value of 0.52, 95% confidence interval [0.35-0.68]; and a standard error of measurement SEM (with a resulting value of 1.28). The following SEM values were found for intra-assessor agreement: Assessor 1 =1.52, assessor 2 =1.47, and assessor 3 = 1.19. These findings suggest the inter- and intra-assessor reliability of a clinical test of pelvic tilting has insufficient reliability to distinguish between participants across multiple assessors. An observed change of at least 1.5 points may be necessary to be confident true change in test performance has occurred. Key Words: Low Back Pain, Movement Control, Reliability</description><subject>Agreements</subject><subject>Back pain</subject><subject>Chronic pain</subject><subject>Confidence intervals</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>Low back pain</subject><subject>Pelvis</subject><subject>Physical therapy</subject><subject>Standard error of measurement</subject><subject>Values</subject><issn>0303-7193</issn><issn>2230-4886</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNptkctLAzEQxoMoWKtH7wFB9LA1j81jvUipb-rjoBcvIclmbWS7qZus0v_erQoqyBxmGH7ffAwfALsYjTDjuDi6fbq-P2J4hEeIr4EBIRRluZR8HQwQRTQTuKCbYCvGF4SoYEQMwPG9q9-8hcnXCfoGRp-Sb56P4WmAy9DB6Bx8n-kEr1bjCTy40UvjYBPS4TbYqHQd3c53H4LH87OHyWU2vbu4moynmSWC8qywTCLGy4JoWoq8YEaTihokK6k14gZLI0ptTCVzq0nJDTcF4raUuSFUFJgOwd7X3UUbXjsXk3oJXdv0lopIlBPGaC5-qGddO-WbKqRW27mPVo1FnlPW_y57avQP1Vfp5t6GxlW-3_8R7P8SzJyu0yyGuks-NPEvmH2Btg0xtq5Si9bPdbtUGKnPeNQqHsWwwgpx-gHz_32N</recordid><startdate>20230301</startdate><enddate>20230301</enddate><creator>Bagg, Matthew</creator><creator>Skinner, Ian</creator><creator>Moloney, Niamh</creator><creator>Lock, Martin</creator><creator>McAuley, James</creator><creator>Rabey, Martin</creator><general>New Zealand Society of Physiotherapists</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TS</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AYAGU</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230301</creationdate><title>Pelvic tilt in sitting: Do you see what I see? (Maybe not)</title><author>Bagg, Matthew ; Skinner, Ian ; Moloney, Niamh ; Lock, Martin ; McAuley, James ; Rabey, Martin</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2736-9c58056d92a3d7495ba2f3b08f8aa06b18b7dabbf84ca2d6b6b906cd84b237913</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Agreements</topic><topic>Back pain</topic><topic>Chronic pain</topic><topic>Confidence intervals</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>Low back pain</topic><topic>Pelvis</topic><topic>Physical therapy</topic><topic>Standard error of measurement</topic><topic>Values</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bagg, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Skinner, Ian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moloney, Niamh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lock, Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McAuley, James</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rabey, Martin</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Proquest Nursing &amp; Allied Health Source</collection><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Australia &amp; New Zealand Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><jtitle>New Zealand journal of physiotherapy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bagg, Matthew</au><au>Skinner, Ian</au><au>Moloney, Niamh</au><au>Lock, Martin</au><au>McAuley, James</au><au>Rabey, Martin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Pelvic tilt in sitting: Do you see what I see? (Maybe not)</atitle><jtitle>New Zealand journal of physiotherapy</jtitle><date>2023-03-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>51</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>48</spage><epage>52</epage><pages>48-52</pages><issn>0303-7193</issn><eissn>2230-4886</eissn><abstract>Examination of pelvic tilt movements are utilised across many fields of physiotherapy. It is important for physiotherapists to establish a clinically helpful, time-efficient test assessing pelvic tilt, reliable within and across multiple assessors. Elgueta-Cancino et al. (2014) described such a test; however, their methodology reduced clinical applicability and revealed limitations regarding examination of test reliability. This study aimed to independently evaluate the reliability of a clinical test of pelvic tilt. Twenty-three participants with chronic low back pain completed the test following standardised instructions and demonstration by one assessor. Participants tilted the pelvis forwards and backwards 10 times in sitting. The test was simultaneously scored on the scale originally described by three blinded assessors. Participants repeated the test one-week later. Inter-assessor reliability was determined using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 2,1), with a resulting value of 0.52, 95% confidence interval [0.35-0.68]; and a standard error of measurement SEM (with a resulting value of 1.28). The following SEM values were found for intra-assessor agreement: Assessor 1 =1.52, assessor 2 =1.47, and assessor 3 = 1.19. These findings suggest the inter- and intra-assessor reliability of a clinical test of pelvic tilting has insufficient reliability to distinguish between participants across multiple assessors. An observed change of at least 1.5 points may be necessary to be confident true change in test performance has occurred. Key Words: Low Back Pain, Movement Control, Reliability</abstract><cop>Wellington</cop><pub>New Zealand Society of Physiotherapists</pub><doi>10.15619/NZJP/51.1.06</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0303-7193
ispartof New Zealand journal of physiotherapy, 2023-03, Vol.51 (1), p.48-52
issn 0303-7193
2230-4886
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2804255347
source EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Agreements
Back pain
Chronic pain
Confidence intervals
Diagnosis
Low back pain
Pelvis
Physical therapy
Standard error of measurement
Values
title Pelvic tilt in sitting: Do you see what I see? (Maybe not)
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T23%3A17%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Pelvic%20tilt%20in%20sitting:%20Do%20you%20see%20what%20I%20see?%20(Maybe%20not)&rft.jtitle=New%20Zealand%20journal%20of%20physiotherapy&rft.au=Bagg,%20Matthew&rft.date=2023-03-01&rft.volume=51&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=48&rft.epage=52&rft.pages=48-52&rft.issn=0303-7193&rft.eissn=2230-4886&rft_id=info:doi/10.15619/NZJP/51.1.06&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA744351938%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2804255347&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A744351938&rfr_iscdi=true