Measuring the sacral inclination angle in clinical practice: Is there an alternative to radiographs?
Background: In patients with low back pain (LBP) the position of the pelvis is often a focus of physical or manual therapy. The “gold standard” to determine sacral inclination is by radiograph, but methods to measure sacral inclination externally with an inclinometer have also been introduced. Objec...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics 2001-10, Vol.24 (8), p.505-508 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 508 |
---|---|
container_issue | 8 |
container_start_page | 505 |
container_title | Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics |
container_volume | 24 |
creator | Bierma-Zeinstra, Sita M.A. van Gool, Jack J.C.M. Bernsen, Roos M.D. Njoo, Khing H. |
description | Background: In patients with low back pain (LBP) the position of the pelvis is often a focus of physical or manual therapy. The “gold standard” to determine sacral inclination is by radiograph, but methods to measure sacral inclination externally with an inclinometer have also been introduced. Objective: To determine the validity of the inclinometer in measuring the sacral inclination in patients with LBP. Subjects: Adult patients with LBP who were referred by the general practitioner to the hospital for radiograph examination of the lumbosacral spine were included. Methods: Measurement of sacral inclination acquired with the inclinometer, simultaneous with the x-ray exposure, was compared with the “gold standard” measurement of sacral inclination on the radiograph. Regression analysis was used to define the measurement error. Results: Of 50 consecutive patients with LBP, radiographs of 41 patients were useful for the required measurements on the radiograph. The mean difference between the radiographic and inclinometer method was 23.12°. The measurement error was 8.26°. Regression analyses showed poor correlation between both methods (r = 0.28). Conclusions: The method we used to measure sacral inclination with an inclinometer proved to be invalid. (J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2001;24:505-8) |
doi_str_mv | 10.1067/mmt.2001.118207 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72226740</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0161475401089084</els_id><sourcerecordid>72226740</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c343t-1cc875b75f278cb131c809d1e29cceed8f72ea323523de80c0dd642900f99cd23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kDtLBDEUhYMouj5qO0llN2seM5OJjcjiCxQbrUP25s4amceaZAX_vRl2wcoqcPKdA_cj5JyzOWe1uur7NBeM8TnnjWBqj8x4JUVRV029T2aM17woVVUekeMYPxljWurmkBxxXqsc6xlxL2jjJvhhRdMH0mgh2I76ATo_2OTHgdph1WFO6BR5yL_rYCF5wGv6FKdWwAxR2yUMU-cbaRppsM6Pq2DXH_HmlBy0tot4tntPyPv93dvisXh-fXha3D4XIEuZCg7QqGqpqlaoBpZccmiYdhyFBkB0TasEWilkJaTDhgFzri6FZqzVGpyQJ-Ryu7sO49cGYzK9j4BdZwccN9EoIUStSpbBqy0IYYwxYGvWwfc2_BjOzCTWZLFmEmu2YnPjYje9Wfbo_vidyQzoLYD5wG-PwUTwOAA6HxCScaP_d_wX9O6ITA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>72226740</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Measuring the sacral inclination angle in clinical practice: Is there an alternative to radiographs?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Bierma-Zeinstra, Sita M.A. ; van Gool, Jack J.C.M. ; Bernsen, Roos M.D. ; Njoo, Khing H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bierma-Zeinstra, Sita M.A. ; van Gool, Jack J.C.M. ; Bernsen, Roos M.D. ; Njoo, Khing H.</creatorcontrib><description>Background: In patients with low back pain (LBP) the position of the pelvis is often a focus of physical or manual therapy. The “gold standard” to determine sacral inclination is by radiograph, but methods to measure sacral inclination externally with an inclinometer have also been introduced. Objective: To determine the validity of the inclinometer in measuring the sacral inclination in patients with LBP. Subjects: Adult patients with LBP who were referred by the general practitioner to the hospital for radiograph examination of the lumbosacral spine were included. Methods: Measurement of sacral inclination acquired with the inclinometer, simultaneous with the x-ray exposure, was compared with the “gold standard” measurement of sacral inclination on the radiograph. Regression analysis was used to define the measurement error. Results: Of 50 consecutive patients with LBP, radiographs of 41 patients were useful for the required measurements on the radiograph. The mean difference between the radiographic and inclinometer method was 23.12°. The measurement error was 8.26°. Regression analyses showed poor correlation between both methods (r = 0.28). Conclusions: The method we used to measure sacral inclination with an inclinometer proved to be invalid. (J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2001;24:505-8)</description><identifier>ISSN: 0161-4754</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-6586</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1067/mmt.2001.118207</identifier><identifier>PMID: 11677549</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Evaluation Studies as Topic ; Female ; Humans ; Low Back Pain ; Low Back Pain - diagnostic imaging ; Low Back Pain - pathology ; Low Back Pain - physiopathology ; Lumbar Lordosis ; Lumbar Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging ; Lumbar Vertebrae - pathology ; Lumbar Vertebrae - physiopathology ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Pelvimetry ; Pelvis ; Prognosis ; Radiography ; Range of Motion, Articular ; Regression Analysis ; Reproducibility of Results ; Sacrum - diagnostic imaging ; Sacrum - pathology ; Sacrum - physiopathology ; Validity</subject><ispartof>Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics, 2001-10, Vol.24 (8), p.505-508</ispartof><rights>2001 JMPT</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c343t-1cc875b75f278cb131c809d1e29cceed8f72ea323523de80c0dd642900f99cd23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c343t-1cc875b75f278cb131c809d1e29cceed8f72ea323523de80c0dd642900f99cd23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1067/mmt.2001.118207$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,3537,27905,27906,45976</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11677549$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bierma-Zeinstra, Sita M.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Gool, Jack J.C.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bernsen, Roos M.D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Njoo, Khing H.</creatorcontrib><title>Measuring the sacral inclination angle in clinical practice: Is there an alternative to radiographs?</title><title>Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics</title><addtitle>J Manipulative Physiol Ther</addtitle><description>Background: In patients with low back pain (LBP) the position of the pelvis is often a focus of physical or manual therapy. The “gold standard” to determine sacral inclination is by radiograph, but methods to measure sacral inclination externally with an inclinometer have also been introduced. Objective: To determine the validity of the inclinometer in measuring the sacral inclination in patients with LBP. Subjects: Adult patients with LBP who were referred by the general practitioner to the hospital for radiograph examination of the lumbosacral spine were included. Methods: Measurement of sacral inclination acquired with the inclinometer, simultaneous with the x-ray exposure, was compared with the “gold standard” measurement of sacral inclination on the radiograph. Regression analysis was used to define the measurement error. Results: Of 50 consecutive patients with LBP, radiographs of 41 patients were useful for the required measurements on the radiograph. The mean difference between the radiographic and inclinometer method was 23.12°. The measurement error was 8.26°. Regression analyses showed poor correlation between both methods (r = 0.28). Conclusions: The method we used to measure sacral inclination with an inclinometer proved to be invalid. (J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2001;24:505-8)</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Evaluation Studies as Topic</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Low Back Pain</subject><subject>Low Back Pain - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Low Back Pain - pathology</subject><subject>Low Back Pain - physiopathology</subject><subject>Lumbar Lordosis</subject><subject>Lumbar Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Lumbar Vertebrae - pathology</subject><subject>Lumbar Vertebrae - physiopathology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Pelvimetry</subject><subject>Pelvis</subject><subject>Prognosis</subject><subject>Radiography</subject><subject>Range of Motion, Articular</subject><subject>Regression Analysis</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Sacrum - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Sacrum - pathology</subject><subject>Sacrum - physiopathology</subject><subject>Validity</subject><issn>0161-4754</issn><issn>1532-6586</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kDtLBDEUhYMouj5qO0llN2seM5OJjcjiCxQbrUP25s4amceaZAX_vRl2wcoqcPKdA_cj5JyzOWe1uur7NBeM8TnnjWBqj8x4JUVRV029T2aM17woVVUekeMYPxljWurmkBxxXqsc6xlxL2jjJvhhRdMH0mgh2I76ATo_2OTHgdph1WFO6BR5yL_rYCF5wGv6FKdWwAxR2yUMU-cbaRppsM6Pq2DXH_HmlBy0tot4tntPyPv93dvisXh-fXha3D4XIEuZCg7QqGqpqlaoBpZccmiYdhyFBkB0TasEWilkJaTDhgFzri6FZqzVGpyQJ-Ryu7sO49cGYzK9j4BdZwccN9EoIUStSpbBqy0IYYwxYGvWwfc2_BjOzCTWZLFmEmu2YnPjYje9Wfbo_vidyQzoLYD5wG-PwUTwOAA6HxCScaP_d_wX9O6ITA</recordid><startdate>20011001</startdate><enddate>20011001</enddate><creator>Bierma-Zeinstra, Sita M.A.</creator><creator>van Gool, Jack J.C.M.</creator><creator>Bernsen, Roos M.D.</creator><creator>Njoo, Khing H.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20011001</creationdate><title>Measuring the sacral inclination angle in clinical practice: Is there an alternative to radiographs?</title><author>Bierma-Zeinstra, Sita M.A. ; van Gool, Jack J.C.M. ; Bernsen, Roos M.D. ; Njoo, Khing H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c343t-1cc875b75f278cb131c809d1e29cceed8f72ea323523de80c0dd642900f99cd23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Evaluation Studies as Topic</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Low Back Pain</topic><topic>Low Back Pain - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Low Back Pain - pathology</topic><topic>Low Back Pain - physiopathology</topic><topic>Lumbar Lordosis</topic><topic>Lumbar Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Lumbar Vertebrae - pathology</topic><topic>Lumbar Vertebrae - physiopathology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Pelvimetry</topic><topic>Pelvis</topic><topic>Prognosis</topic><topic>Radiography</topic><topic>Range of Motion, Articular</topic><topic>Regression Analysis</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Sacrum - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Sacrum - pathology</topic><topic>Sacrum - physiopathology</topic><topic>Validity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bierma-Zeinstra, Sita M.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Gool, Jack J.C.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bernsen, Roos M.D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Njoo, Khing H.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bierma-Zeinstra, Sita M.A.</au><au>van Gool, Jack J.C.M.</au><au>Bernsen, Roos M.D.</au><au>Njoo, Khing H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Measuring the sacral inclination angle in clinical practice: Is there an alternative to radiographs?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics</jtitle><addtitle>J Manipulative Physiol Ther</addtitle><date>2001-10-01</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>505</spage><epage>508</epage><pages>505-508</pages><issn>0161-4754</issn><eissn>1532-6586</eissn><abstract>Background: In patients with low back pain (LBP) the position of the pelvis is often a focus of physical or manual therapy. The “gold standard” to determine sacral inclination is by radiograph, but methods to measure sacral inclination externally with an inclinometer have also been introduced. Objective: To determine the validity of the inclinometer in measuring the sacral inclination in patients with LBP. Subjects: Adult patients with LBP who were referred by the general practitioner to the hospital for radiograph examination of the lumbosacral spine were included. Methods: Measurement of sacral inclination acquired with the inclinometer, simultaneous with the x-ray exposure, was compared with the “gold standard” measurement of sacral inclination on the radiograph. Regression analysis was used to define the measurement error. Results: Of 50 consecutive patients with LBP, radiographs of 41 patients were useful for the required measurements on the radiograph. The mean difference between the radiographic and inclinometer method was 23.12°. The measurement error was 8.26°. Regression analyses showed poor correlation between both methods (r = 0.28). Conclusions: The method we used to measure sacral inclination with an inclinometer proved to be invalid. (J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2001;24:505-8)</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>11677549</pmid><doi>10.1067/mmt.2001.118207</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0161-4754 |
ispartof | Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics, 2001-10, Vol.24 (8), p.505-508 |
issn | 0161-4754 1532-6586 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72226740 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Adult Evaluation Studies as Topic Female Humans Low Back Pain Low Back Pain - diagnostic imaging Low Back Pain - pathology Low Back Pain - physiopathology Lumbar Lordosis Lumbar Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging Lumbar Vertebrae - pathology Lumbar Vertebrae - physiopathology Male Middle Aged Pelvimetry Pelvis Prognosis Radiography Range of Motion, Articular Regression Analysis Reproducibility of Results Sacrum - diagnostic imaging Sacrum - pathology Sacrum - physiopathology Validity |
title | Measuring the sacral inclination angle in clinical practice: Is there an alternative to radiographs? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T19%3A22%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Measuring%20the%20sacral%20inclination%20angle%20in%20clinical%20practice:%20Is%20there%20an%20alternative%20to%20radiographs?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20manipulative%20and%20physiological%20therapeutics&rft.au=Bierma-Zeinstra,%20Sita%20M.A.&rft.date=2001-10-01&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=505&rft.epage=508&rft.pages=505-508&rft.issn=0161-4754&rft.eissn=1532-6586&rft_id=info:doi/10.1067/mmt.2001.118207&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E72226740%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=72226740&rft_id=info:pmid/11677549&rft_els_id=S0161475401089084&rfr_iscdi=true |