Accuracy and reliability of knee goniometry methods

Abstract Background Measuring knee range of motion is important in examination and as a post-operative outcome. It is therefore important that measurements are accurate. Knee angles can be measured by traditional goniometers, smartphone apps are readily available and there are also purpose made digi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Graeme Ethan Hancock, Tracey Hepworth, Kevin Wembridge
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SpringerOpen 2018-10-01
Series:Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40634-018-0161-5
id doaj-a75b7cf539764bab9a280440b29f717e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-a75b7cf539764bab9a280440b29f717e2020-11-25T00:04:56ZengSpringerOpenJournal of Experimental Orthopaedics2197-11532018-10-01511610.1186/s40634-018-0161-5Accuracy and reliability of knee goniometry methodsGraeme Ethan Hancock0Tracey Hepworth1Kevin Wembridge2Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustRotherham General HospitalRotherham General HospitalAbstract Background Measuring knee range of motion is important in examination and as a post-operative outcome. It is therefore important that measurements are accurate. Knee angles can be measured by traditional goniometers, smartphone apps are readily available and there are also purpose made digital devices. Establishing the minimum difference between methods is essential to monitor change. The purpose of this study was to assess reliability and minimum significant difference of visual estimation, short and long arm goniometers, a smartphone application and a digital inclinometer. Methods Knee angles were assessed by 3 users: one consultant orthopaedic surgeon, one orthopaedic surgical trainee and an experienced physiotherapist. All 5 methods were used to assess 3 knee angles, plus full active flexion and extension, on 6 knees. The subjects had knee angles fixed using limb supports during measurement, whilst maintaining appropriate clearance to allow a reproduction of assessment in clinic. Users were then blinded to their results and the test was repeated. A total of 300 measurements were taken. Results Inter-rater and intra-rater reliabilities were high for all methods (all > 0.99 and > 0.98 respectively). The digital inclinometer was the most accurate method of assessment (6° minimum significant difference). The long arm goniometer had a minimum significant different of 10°, smartphone app 12° and both visual estimation and short arm goniometry were found to be equally inaccurate (14° minimum significant difference). Conclusion The digital inclinometer was the most accurate method of knee angle measurement, followed by the long arm goniometer. Visual estimation and short goniometers should not be used if an accurate assessment is required.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40634-018-0161-5
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Graeme Ethan Hancock
Tracey Hepworth
Kevin Wembridge
spellingShingle Graeme Ethan Hancock
Tracey Hepworth
Kevin Wembridge
Accuracy and reliability of knee goniometry methods
Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
author_facet Graeme Ethan Hancock
Tracey Hepworth
Kevin Wembridge
author_sort Graeme Ethan Hancock
title Accuracy and reliability of knee goniometry methods
title_short Accuracy and reliability of knee goniometry methods
title_full Accuracy and reliability of knee goniometry methods
title_fullStr Accuracy and reliability of knee goniometry methods
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy and reliability of knee goniometry methods
title_sort accuracy and reliability of knee goniometry methods
publisher SpringerOpen
series Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
issn 2197-1153
publishDate 2018-10-01
description Abstract Background Measuring knee range of motion is important in examination and as a post-operative outcome. It is therefore important that measurements are accurate. Knee angles can be measured by traditional goniometers, smartphone apps are readily available and there are also purpose made digital devices. Establishing the minimum difference between methods is essential to monitor change. The purpose of this study was to assess reliability and minimum significant difference of visual estimation, short and long arm goniometers, a smartphone application and a digital inclinometer. Methods Knee angles were assessed by 3 users: one consultant orthopaedic surgeon, one orthopaedic surgical trainee and an experienced physiotherapist. All 5 methods were used to assess 3 knee angles, plus full active flexion and extension, on 6 knees. The subjects had knee angles fixed using limb supports during measurement, whilst maintaining appropriate clearance to allow a reproduction of assessment in clinic. Users were then blinded to their results and the test was repeated. A total of 300 measurements were taken. Results Inter-rater and intra-rater reliabilities were high for all methods (all > 0.99 and > 0.98 respectively). The digital inclinometer was the most accurate method of assessment (6° minimum significant difference). The long arm goniometer had a minimum significant different of 10°, smartphone app 12° and both visual estimation and short arm goniometry were found to be equally inaccurate (14° minimum significant difference). Conclusion The digital inclinometer was the most accurate method of knee angle measurement, followed by the long arm goniometer. Visual estimation and short goniometers should not be used if an accurate assessment is required.
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40634-018-0161-5
work_keys_str_mv AT graemeethanhancock accuracyandreliabilityofkneegoniometrymethods
AT traceyhepworth accuracyandreliabilityofkneegoniometrymethods
AT kevinwembridge accuracyandreliabilityofkneegoniometrymethods
_version_ 1725427192516575232