Manual de goniometría. Cynthia C. Norkin

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ Assessment of Joint Motion. En: Basmajian, JV (ed): Therapeutic Exercise, 4.^a ed. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, 1984.

      25. Rondinelli, RD (ed): Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 6.^a ed. American Medical Association, Chicago, 2009.

      26. Cocchiarella, L y Anderson, GBJ (eds): Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 5.^a ed. American Medical Association, Chicago, 2001.

      27. Fox, RF y Van Breemen, J: Chronic Rheumatism, Causation and Treatment. Churchill, London, 1934, p 327.

      28. Schenkar, WW: Goniometry: An improved method of joint motion measurement. N Y State J Med 56:539, 1956.

      29. Clarkson, HM: Musculoskeletal Assessment: Joint Motion and Muscle Testing, 3.^a ed. Wolters Kluwer Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Filadelfia, 2013.

      30. Performance Attainment Associates. Product descriptions. 2016. Procedente de [www.spineproducts.com].

      31. Petherick, M, et al: Concurrent validity and intertester reliability of universal and fluid-based goniometers for active elbow range of motion. Phys Ther 68:966, 1988.

      32. Rheault, W, et al: Intertester reliability and concurrent validity of fluid-based and universal goniometers for active knee flexion. Phys Ther 68:1676, 1988.

      33. Goodwin, J, et al: Clinical methods of goniometry: A comparative study. Disabil Rehabil 14:10, 1992.

      34. Rome, K y Cowieson, F: A reliability study of the universal goniometer, fluid goniometer, and electrogoniometer for the measurement of ankle dorsiflexion. Foot Ankle Int 17:28, 1996.

      35. Karpovich, PV y Karpovich, GP: Electrogoniometer: A new device for study of joints in action. Fed Proc 18:79, 1959.

      36. Kettelkamp, DB, et al: An electrogoniometric study of knee motion in normal gait. J Bone Joint Surg Am 52:775, 1970.

      37. Knutzen, KM, Bates, BT y Hamill, J: Electrogoniometry of postsurgical knee bracing in running. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 62:172, 1983.

      38. Carey, JR, Patterson, JR y Hollenstein, PJ: Sensitivity and reliability of force tracking and joint-movement tracking scores in healthy subjects. Phys Ther 68:1087, 1988.

      39. Torburn, L, Perry, J y Gronley, JK: Assessment of rearfoot motion: Passive positioning, one-legged standing, gait. Foot Ankle Int 19:688, 1998.

      40. Clapper, MP y Wolf, SL: Comparison of the reliability of the OrthoRanger and the standard goniometer for assessing active lower extremity range of motion. Phys Ther 68:214, 1988.

      41. Greene, BL y Wolf, SL: Upper extremity joint movement: Comparison of two measurement devices. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 70:288, 1989.

      42. Ball, P y Johnson, GR: Reliability of hindfoot goniometry when using a flexible electrogoniometer. Clin Biomech 8:13, 1993.

      43. Shiratsu, A y Coury, HJ: Reliability and accuracy of different sensors of a flexible electrogoniometer. Clin Biomech 18(7):682, 2003.

      44. Piriyaprasarth, P y Morris, ME: Psychometric properties of measurement tools for quantifying knee joint position and movement: A systematic review. Knee 14(1):2, 2006.

      45. Perriman, DM, et al: Validation of the flexible electrogoniometer for measuring thoracic kyphosis. Spine 15(14):35, 2010.

      46. Burnfield, J y Norkin, C: Examination of Gait. En: O’Sullivan, S, Schmitz, TJ y Fulk, GD (eds): Physical Rehabilitation, 6.^a ed. FA Davis, Filadelfia, 2014.

      47. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons: Joint Motion: Method of Measuring and Recording. AAOS, Chicago, 1965.

      48. Youdas, JW, Bogard, CL y Suman, VJ: Reliability of goniometric measurements and visual estimates of ankle joint range of motion obtained in a clinical setting. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 74:1113, 1993.

      49. Watkins, MA, et al: Reliability of goniometric measurements and visual estimates of knee range of motion obtained in a clinical setting. Phys Ther 71:90, 1991.

      50. Youdas, JW, Carey, JR y Garrett, TR: Reliability of measurements of cervical spine range of motion: Comparison of three methods. Phys Ther 71:98, 1991.

      51. Greene, WB y Heckman, JD: The Clinical Measurement of Joint Motion. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Rosemont, IL, 1994.

      52. Van de Pol, RJ, van Triffel, E y Lucas, C: Inter-rater reliability for measurement of passive physiological range of motion of upper extremity joints is better if instruments are used: A systematic review. J Physiother 56(1):7, 2010.

      53. Gerhardt, JJ y Russe, OA: International SFTR Method of Measuring and Recording Joint Motion. Hans Huber, Bern, 1975.

      54. Gerhardt, JJ: Clinical measurement of joint motion and position in the neutral-zero method and SFTR: Basic principles. Int Rehabil Med 5:161, 1983.

      55. Kisner, C y Colby, LA: Therapeutic Exercise, 5.^a ed. FA Davis, Filadelfia, 2012.

      56. Hertling, D y Kessler, RM: Management of Common Musculoskeletal Disorders, 4.^a ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Filadelfia, 2006.

      57. Johansson, C y Chinworth, SA: Mobility in Context: Principles of Patient Care Skills. FA Davis, Filadelfia, 2012.

      CAPÍTULO 3

       Validez y fiabilidad de la evaluación goniométrica

       David A. ScalzittiD. Joyce White

Validez

      Para que la goniometría aporte información significativa, las mediciones deben ser válidas. La validez es «el grado en que se infiere una interpretación útil (significativa) de una medición». Dicho de otro modo, la validez de una medición se refiere a cuán bien la medición representa el valor real de la variable de interés y lo bien que se usa esta medición para un propósito específico. El propósito de la goniometría es medir el ángulo creado en una articulación por los huesos adyacentes del cuerpo. Por tanto, toda medición goniométrica válida representa el ángulo articular real que aporta datos para usarlos en la toma de decisiones clínicas. El ángulo articular obtenido con una medición goniométrica sirve para describir una posición articular específica o, si se compara una posición articular inicial con la posición final, un grado de movilidad (ROM). En esta sección, se exponen los cuatro tipos principales de validez (validez aparente, validez de contenido, validez de criterio y validez de constructo) y su relación con la medición del movimiento articular.

Validez aparente

      La validez aparente muestra que el instrumento parece medir lo que se propone medir, o sea, que es plausible para los que utilizan la prueba.^2-4 Gran parte de la literatura sobre las mediciones goniométricas no aborda específicamente СКАЧАТЬ