Article

Cervical sensorimotor control (CSMC) becomes increasingly important
in the assessment and treatment of patients with neck pain. This review aims to
compare commonly used CSMC measuring methods in terms of required tasks,
measuring device and clinimetric properties. METHODS: A systematic review
of two databases, followed by methodological quality assessment (CBO guidelines).
RESULTS: The methodological quality of 34 included articles was generally good
(five to seven out of eight), the inter-rater agreement was excellent
(kappaw=0.966, p<0.01). Following tasks were found: head repositioning accuracy
to the neutral head position (HRA-to-NHP) and to a target position
(HRA-to-target), a virtual reality test, a continuous linear movement technique
(CLMT) and an object following non-linear movement technique (NLMT) (The Fly).
Test-retest reliability was fair to excellent (ICC 0.35-0.87) for the HRA-to-NHP,
very bad to excellent (ICC 0.01-0.90) for the HRA-to-target, fair to good (ICC
0.25-0.77) for the virtual reality test and moderate to excellent (ICC:
0.60-0.86) for The Fly. The reliability of the CLMT was not documented. The
HRA-to-NHP, The Fly and the CLMT can discriminate between patients with neck
complaints and controls (discriminant validity). Currently, only The Fly can
discriminate between different patient populations (post-traumatic and
non-traumatic neck pain). The sensitivity, specificity and responsiveness of the
methods have to be assessed in future research. CONCLUSIONS: The dynamic method
The Fly appears to be more reliable than the HRA-to-NHP and is able to
discriminate between different patient populations. The diagnostic potential is
to be confirmed in future research.
CI - Copyright (c) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Langue : ANGLAIS