| Visual Assessment |
Fedorak et al (2003) found fair intra-rater (kappa= 0.50) and poor inter-rater reliability (kappa= 0.16) for visual assessment of lumbar lordosis with analysis of photographs of individuals with and without low back pain. No studies directly assess reliability of visual assessment of pelvic tilt.
|
No studies |
| Hand-held inclinometer |
Prushansky et al (2008) found good intra-rater reliability (ICC>0.87; SEM 0.9-2.26) for measuring anterior pelvic tilt, neutral pelvic tilt, posterior pelvic tilt, and total pelvic tilt in the standing position, and moderate inter-rater reliability (ICC=0.60; SEM=2.59) for the total pelvic tilt in male subjects with 30 healthy subjects (15 f; age 25.4 +/- 1.7) using a digital inclinometer (Fennel, Germany). They found no significant differences between testers indicating inter-rater reliability (p<0.05) for total pelvic tilt and all pelvic tilt measures in females.
|
No studies |
| Caliper-based pelvic inclinometer |
Herrington (2011) found good intra-rater reliability (ICC=0.87; SEM=1.1) using the PALM palpation meter pelvic inclinometer with 120 healthy subjects (55 f; age 23.8 +/- 2.1) for measuring the standing pelvic position. Crowell et al (1994) found excellent intra-rater (ICC=0.92-0.96) and inter-rater (ICC=0.95) reliability when using a non-commercialized caliper-based inclinometer and assessing 26 healthy males (average age 45) in a standing position. Beardsley et al (2016) found good inter-rater reliability (ICC=0.81-0.88), good test-retest reliability within a single session (ICC=0.88-0.95) and moderate to good reliability for test-retest reliability between sessions (ICC=0.65-0.85) when using a digital pelvic inclinometer and assessing 18 healthy subjects (6 females, age 23.6 +/- 4.7) in a standing position. Hagins et al (1998) found excellent intra-rater (ICC=0.98) and good inter-rater (ICC=0.89) reliability and a high SEM (3.6) using the PALM palpation meter pelvic inclinometer with 24 healthy subjects (15 female; age 27) in a standing position. The measurements in this study were done over clothing.
|
Crowell et al (1994) found high degree of agreement as compared to a roentgenographic measure (ICC=0.93) when using a non-commercialized caliper-based inclinometer and assessing 26 healthy males (average age 45) in a standing position. Hayes et al (2016) found good correlation between pelvic tilt measurements with the PALM palpation meter and radiographic measures in 50 healthy subjects (age 18-79, sex not reported) for total pelvic tilt (r=.509; p<0.001) and changes in anterior pelvic tilt (r=.676; p<0.001) but poor correlation for changes in posterior pelvic tilt (r=.298; p=0.036).
|
| Smartphone Application |
|
No studies |
