The Validity and Reliability of "Spinal Mouse" Assessment of Spinal Curvatures in the Frontal Plane in Pediatric Adolescent Idiopathic Thoraco-lumbar Curves

Overview

Journal Eur Spine J

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2015 Apr 23

PMID 25900295

Citations 28

Authors

Ayse Livanelioglu

Fatma Kaya

Vugar Nabiyev

Gokhan Demirkiran

Tuzun Firat

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: Radiological measurement has been accepted as the gold standard for evaluating scoliosis for many years. However, exposure of children to X-ray constitutes a major limitation of the radiological methods. Spinal Mouse (SM) is a safe, practical and easy to perform measurement of curvature in scoliosis, but its validity and reliability have not been investigated. The aim of this study was to investigate the validity and reliability of Cobb angle and SM measurements in children with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).

Methods: Fifty-one patients with AIS who were followed up conservatively were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 14.4 years (9-18 years). Frontal plane curvatures were evaluated with SM by 2 physiotherapists and the results were compared with radiological measurements. Radiological measurements were performed by 2 orthopedists.

Results: All the measurements were of the thoraco-lumbar curve and the mean value was 35.08° according to Cobb angle measurement. There was no difference between the interobserver measurements of SM (p = 0.256) while the Cobb degrees measured by the 2 orthopedists was different (p = 0.0001). We did not find a statistically significant difference between Cobb measurements and the SM measurements of observer 1 and 2 (p = 0.505). The interobserver and intraobserver agreement of the Cobb and SM measurements was excellent (ICC = 0.872-0.962). When the differences between the evaluations were compared, the interobserver SM differences were seen to be lower than the interobserver Cobb angle differences (p = 0.003). The agreement between the Cobb and SM measurements was higher for curves over 40°. We found a strong or very strong relationship between measurements made with the Cobb and SM methods (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions: We conclude that SM can be used for research and patient follow-up in the clinic as a safe, reliable, quick, and easy to use method with no side effects although it cannot be the only factor to consider when determining the treatment plan of AIS patients.

Citing Articles

Upper extremity functions, spinal posture, and axial rigidity in patients with parkinson's disease.

Korkmaz B, Yasa M, Sonkaya R Acta Neurol Belg. 2024; 125(1):119-126.

PMID: 39436554 DOI: 10.1007/s13760-024-02656-0.

The Effectiveness of Exercise Programs in Adolescents with Thoracic Kyphosis: A Narrative Review.

Yang S, Yi Y, Chang M Healthcare (Basel). 2024; 12(15).

PMID: 39120206 PMC: 11312307. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12151503.

Spinal Postures and Mobility in Children with Achondroplasia vs. Age- and Sex-Matched Healthy Individuals: A Preliminary Report.

Bayartai M, Luomajoki H, Aliverti A, LoMauro A, Tringali G, Sartorio A J Clin Med. 2024; 13(7).

PMID: 38610900 PMC: 11012898. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13072135.

Psychometric properties of clinician-reported and performance-based outcomes cited in a scoping review on spinal manipulation and mobilization for pediatric populations with diverse medical conditions: a systematic review.

Hayton T, Gross A, Basson A, Olson K, Ang O, Milne N J Man Manip Ther. 2023; 32(3):255-283.

PMID: 38070150 PMC: 11216262. DOI: 10.1080/10669817.2023.2269038.

Differences in spinal postures and mobility among adults with Prader-Willi syndrome, essential obesity, and normal-weight individuals.

Bayartai M, Luomajoki H, Tringali G, De Micheli R, Grugni G, Sartorio A Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023; 14:1235030.

PMID: 37800136 PMC: 10548364. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1235030.

References

Salisbury P, Porter R . Measurement of lumbar sagittal mobility. A comparison of methods. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1987; 12(2):190-3. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-198703000-00017. View

Levy A, Goldberg M, Mayo N, Hanley J, Poitras B . Reducing the lifetime risk of cancer from spinal radiographs among people with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996; 21(13):1540-7; discussion 1548. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199607010-00011. View

Doody M, Lonstein J, Stovall M, Hacker D, Luckyanov N, Land C . Breast cancer mortality after diagnostic radiography: findings from the U.S. Scoliosis Cohort Study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25(16):2052-63. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200008150-00009. View

Ovadia D, Bar-On E, Fragniere B, Rigo M, Dickman D, Leitner J . Radiation-free quantitative assessment of scoliosis: a multi center prospective study. Eur Spine J. 2006; 16(1):97-105. PMC: 2198878. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-006-0118-8. View

Parent S, Labelle H, Skalli W, Latimer B, De Guise J . Morphometric analysis of anatomic scoliotic specimens. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002; 27(21):2305-11. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200211010-00002. View

Delorme S, Petit Y, de Guise J, Labelle H, Aubin C, Dansereau J . Assessment of the 3-d reconstruction and high-resolution geometrical modeling of the human skeletal trunk from 2-D radiographic images. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2003; 50(8):989-98. DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2003.814525. View

Vidal C, Ilharreborde B, Azoulay R, Sebag G, Mazda K . Reliability of cervical lordosis and global sagittal spinal balance measurements in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J. 2013; 22(6):1362-7. PMC: 3676559. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-013-2752-2. View

Gstoettner M, Sekyra K, Walochnik N, Winter P, Wachter R, Bach C . Inter- and intraobserver reliability assessment of the Cobb angle: manual versus digital measurement tools. Eur Spine J. 2007; 16(10):1587-92. PMC: 2078306. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-007-0401-3. View

Pruijs J, Hageman M, Keessen W, van der Meer R, van Wieringen J . Variation in Cobb angle measurements in scoliosis. Skeletal Radiol. 1994; 23(7):517-20. DOI: 10.1007/BF00223081. View

10.

Reamy B, Slakey J . Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: review and current concepts. Am Fam Physician. 2001; 64(1):111-6. View

11.

Fortin C, Feldman D, Cheriet F, Labelle H . Validity of a quantitative clinical measurement tool of trunk posture in idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010; 35(19):E988-94. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181cd2cd2. View

12.

Mannion A, Knecht K, Balaban G, Dvorak J, Grob D . A new skin-surface device for measuring the curvature and global and segmental ranges of motion of the spine: reliability of measurements and comparison with data reviewed from the literature. Eur Spine J. 2003; 13(2):122-36. PMC: 3476568. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-003-0618-8. View

13.

Stokes I, Bevins T, Lunn R . Back surface curvature and measurement of lumbar spinal motion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1987; 12(4):355-61. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-198705000-00009. View

14.

Morrissy R, Goldsmith G, Hall E, Kehl D, Cowie G . Measurement of the Cobb angle on radiographs of patients who have scoliosis. Evaluation of intrinsic error. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990; 72(3):320-7. View

15.

Pearcy M . Measurement of back and spinal mobility. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2013; 1(1):44-51. DOI: 10.1016/0268-0033(86)90037-9. View

16.

Beekman C, Hall V . Variability of scoliosis measurement from spinal roentgenograms. Phys Ther. 1979; 59(6):764-5. DOI: 10.1093/ptj/59.6.764. View

17.

Asher M, Burton D . Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: natural history and long term treatment effects. Scoliosis. 2006; 1(1):2. PMC: 1475645. DOI: 10.1186/1748-7161-1-2. View

18.

Mangone M, Raimondi P, Paoloni M, Pellanera S, Di Michele A, Di Renzo S . Vertebral rotation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis calculated by radiograph and back surface analysis-based methods: correlation between the Raimondi method and rasterstereography. Eur Spine J. 2012; 22(2):367-71. PMC: 3555624. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-012-2564-9. View

19.

Ripani M, Di Cesare A, Giombini A, Agnello L, Fagnani F, Pigozzi F . Spinal curvature: comparison of frontal measurements with the Spinal Mouse and radiographic assessment. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2008; 48(4):488-94. View

20.

Pearsall D, Reid J, Hedden D . Comparison of three noninvasive methods for measuring scoliosis. Phys Ther. 1992; 72(9):648-57. DOI: 10.1093/ptj/72.9.648. View