Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2) (remove)
Year of publication
- 2022 (2)
Document Type
- Postprint (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2) (remove)
Keywords
- validation study (2) (remove)
Institute
Background and Aims Wearable inertial sensors may offer additional kinematic parameters of the shoulder compared to traditional instruments such as goniometers when elaborate and time-consuming data processing procedures are undertaken. However, in clinical practice simple-real time motion analysis is required to improve clinical reasoning. Therefore, the aim was to assess the criterion validity between a portable "off-the-shelf" sensor-software system (IMU) and optical motion (Mocap) for measuring kinematic parameters during active shoulder movements. Methods 24 healthy participants (9 female, 15 male, age 29 +/- 4 years, height 177 +/- 11 cm, weight 73 +/- 14 kg) were included. Range of motion (ROM), total range of motion (TROM), peak and mean angular velocity of both systems were assessed during simple (abduction/adduction, horizontal flexion/horizontal extension, vertical flexion/extension, and external/internal rotation) and complex shoulder movements. Criterion validity was determined using intraclass-correlation coefficients (ICC), root mean square error (RMSE) and Bland and Altmann analysis (bias; upper and lower limits of agreement). Results ROM and TROM analysis revealed inconsistent validity during simple (ICC: 0.040-0.733, RMSE: 9.7 degrees-20.3 degrees, bias: 1.2 degrees-50.7 degrees) and insufficient agreement during complex shoulder movements (ICC: 0.104-0.453, RMSE: 10.1 degrees-23.3 degrees, bias: 1.0 degrees-55.9 degrees). Peak angular velocity (ICC: 0.202-0.865, RMSE: 14.6 degrees/s-26.7 degrees/s, bias: 10.2 degrees/s-29.9 degrees/s) and mean angular velocity (ICC: 0.019-0.786, RMSE:6.1 degrees/s-34.2 degrees/s, bias: 1.6 degrees/s-27.8 degrees/s) were inconsistent. Conclusions The "off-the-shelf" sensor-software system showed overall insufficient agreement with the gold standard. Further development of commercial IMU-software-solutions may increase measurement accuracy and permit their integration into everyday clinical practice.
Despite the positive effects of including patients’ preferences into therapy on psychotherapy outcomes, there are still few thoroughly validated assessment tools at hand. We translated the 18-item Cooper-Norcross Inventory of Preferences (C-NIP) into German and aimed at replicating its factor structure. Further, we investigated the reliability of the questionnaire and its convergence with trait measures. A heterogeneous sample of N = 969 participants took part in our online survey. Performing ESEM models, we found acceptable model fit for a four-factor structure similar to the original factor structure. Furthermore, we propose an alternative model following the adjustment of single items. The German C-NIP showed acceptable to good reliability, as well as small correlations with Big-Five personality traits, trait and attachment anxiety, locus of control, and temporal focus. However, we recommend further replication of the factor structure and further validation of the C-NIP.