The reliability of the developed spinal-mouse in evaluating spinal curvatures
Israa Khalifa Mahan1, Aseel Ghazwan1 and Luay Asaad Mahmood2
Department of Biomedical Engineering,Al-Nahrain University, Baghdad,Iraq1
Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology,Faculty of Medicine, Anbar University, Anbar,Iraq2
Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology,Faculty of Medicine, Anbar University, Anbar,Iraq2
Corresponding Author : Israa Khalifa Mahan
Recieved : 27-November-2024; Revised : 20-April-2025; Accepted : 27-April-2025
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the interrater reliability of a developed spinal-mouse (SM) instrument for measuring the sagittal and frontal planes, as well as the overall range of motion (ROM) of the spine in patients with degenerative scoliosis (DS) and kyphosis. Measurements were conducted on two groups: subjects with DS, characterized by a spinal deformity exceeding 20° (n = 10), and subjects with kyphosis, defined by a thoracic kyphosis angle of less than 55° (n = 10). The developed SM was used to evaluate the curvature and mobility of the thoracic and lumbar regions in the sagittal and frontal planes during flexion/extension and left/right lateral flexion, respectively. Two examiners performed the measurements on the same day. Interrater reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and the results were compared to radiological measurements conducted independently by two orthopedists. For patients with kyphosis and DS, interrater ICCs ranged from 0.783 to 0.985 and from 0.791 to 0.933, respectively, with higher reliability observed in the sagittal plane than in the frontal. The SM measurements and Cobb angle values were consistent between raters 1 and 2, demonstrating excellent interrater agreement, with ICCs ranging from 0.860 to 0.924 for kyphosis and 0.833 to 0.889 for DS. Compared to interrater discrepancies in Cobb angle assessments, interobserver variability using the developed SM was notably lower. The findings suggest that the developed SM is a reliable, effective, and user-friendly tool for clinical studies and patient follow-up in spinal disorders.
Keywords
Interrater reliability, Spinal-mouse instrument, Degenerative scoliosis, Kyphosis, Spinal range of motion (ROM), Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
Cite this article
Mahan IK, Ghazwan A, Mahmood LA. The reliability of the developed spinal-mouse in evaluating spinal curvatures. International Journal of Advanced Technology and Engineering Exploration. 2025;12(126):768-786. DOI : 10.19101/IJATEE.2024.111102091
References
[1]
Bazira PJ. Clinically applied anatomy of the vertebral column. Surgery (Oxford). 2021; 39(6):315-23.
[2]
Rutherford BR, Taylor WD, Brown PJ, Sneed JR, Roose SP. Biological aging and the future of geriatric psychiatry. Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biomedical Sciences and Medical Sciences. 2017; 72(3):343-52.
[3]
Picavet HS, Hazes JM. Prevalence of self reported musculoskeletal diseases is high. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2003; 62(7):644-50.
[4]
Roghani T, Zavieh MK, Manshadi FD, King N, Katzman W. Age-related hyperkyphosis: update of its potential causes and clinical impacts-narrative review. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research. 2017; 29:567-77.
[5]
Spitzer S, Shaikh M. Health misperception and healthcare utilisation among older Europeans. The Journal of the Economics of Ageing. 2022; 22:1-11.
[6]
Amaral AS, Simões MR, Freitas S, Vilar M, Sousa LB, Afonso RM. Healthcare decision-making capacity in old age: a qualitative study. Frontiers in Psychology. 2022; 13:1-14.
[7]
Jandrić S. Scoliosis and sport. Sport Logia. 2015; 11(1):1-10.
[8]
Dimitrakis N, Zafeiris CP. Neuromuscular scoliosis: a narrative review. Journal of Research & Practice on the Musculoskeletal System. 2023; 7(2):38-43.
[9]
Kim H, Lee CK, Yeom JS, Lee JH, Cho JH, Shin SI, et al. Asymmetry of the cross-sectional area of paravertebral and psoas muscle in patients with degenerative scoliosis. European Spine Journal. 2013; 22:1332-8.
[10]
Corona-cedillo R, Saavedra-navarrete MT, Espinoza-garcia JJ, Mendoza-aguilar AN, Ternovoy SK, Roldan-valadez E. Imaging assessment of the postoperative spine: an updated pictorial review of selected complications. BioMed Research International. 2021; 2021(1):1-20.
[11]
Nakipoglu GF, Karagoz A, Ozgirgin N. The biomechanics of the lumbosacral region in acute and chronic low back pain patients. Pain Physician. 2008; 11(4):505-11.
[12]
Machida M, Rocos B, Zabjek K, Lebel DE. A comparison of the reliability and vulnerability of 3D sterEOS and 2D EOS when measuring the sagittal spinal alignment of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine Deformity. 2022; 10(5):1029-34.
[13]
Gori T, Münzel T. Biological effects of low-dose radiation: of harm and hormesis. European Heart Journal. 2012; 33(3):292-5.
[14]
Brenner DJ, Elliston CD. Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening. Radiology. 2004; 232(3):735-8.
[15]
Oakley PA, Ehsani NN, Harrison DE. The scoliosis quandary: are radiation exposures from repeated X-rays harmful? Dose-Response. 2019; 17(2):1-10.
[16]
Barrett E, Mccreesh K, Lewis J. Reliability and validity of non-radiographic methods of thoracic kyphosis measurement: a systematic review. Manual Therapy. 2014; 19(1):10-7.
[17]
Todd CM, Agnvall C, Kovac P, Sward A, Johansoon C, Sward L, et al. Validation of spinal sagittal alignment with plain radiographs and the debrunner kyphometer. Medical Research Archives. 2015; 2(1):1-25.
[18]
Roggio F, Petrigna L, Trovato B, Zanghì M, Sortino M, Vitale E, et al. Thermography and rasterstereography as a combined infrared method to assess the posture of healthy individuals. Scientific Reports. 2023; 13(1):1-10.
[19]
Cohen L, Kobayashi S, Simic M, Dennis S, Refshauge K, Pappas E. Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review. Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders. 2017; 12:1-2.
[20]
Colati R, Pagano SA, Colati SR, Pagano A. Effectiveness of osteopathic treatment on the spinal column as measured by the spinal mouse®: a case series. Cureus. 2022; 14(8):1-9.
[21]
Demir E, Güzel N, Çobanoğlu G, Kafa N. The reliability of measurements with the spinal mouse device in frontal and sagittal planes in asymptomatic female adolescents. Annals of Clinical and Analytical Medicine. 2020; 11(2):146-9.
[22]
Domokos B, Beer L, Reuther S, Raschka C, Spang C. Immediate effects of isolated lumbar extension resistance exercise (ILEX) on spine posture and mobility measured with the IDIAG spinal mouse system. Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology. 2023; 8(2):1-10.
[23]
Roghani T, Zavieh MK, Rahimi A, Talebian S, Manshadi FD, Baghban AA, et al. The reliability of standing sagittal measurements of spinal curvature and range of motion in older women with and without hyperkyphosis using a skin-surface device. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 2017; 40(9):685-91.
[24]
Post RB, Leferink VJ. Spinal mobility: sagittal range of motion measured with the SpinalMouse, a new non-invasive device. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery. 2004; 124:187-92.
[25]
Mannion AF, 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. European Spine Journal. 2004; 13:122-36.
[26]
Kellis E, Adamou G, Tzilios G, Emmanouilidou M. Reliability of spinal range of motion in healthy boys using a skin-surface device. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 2008; 31(8):570-6.
[27]
Zafereo J, Wang-price S, Brown J, Carson E. Reliability and comparison of spinal end-range motion assessment using a skin-surface device in participants with and without low back pain. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 2016; 39(6):434-42.
[28]
Livanelioglu A, Kaya F, Nabiyev V, Demirkiran G, Fırat T. The validity and reliability of “spinal mouse” assessment of spinal curvatures in the frontal plane in pediatric adolescent idiopathic thoraco-lumbar curves. European Spine Journal. 2016; 25:476-82.
[29]
Walaa SM, Walaa ME. Prevalence of scoliosis among Majmaah university physical therapy students-Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Medical Research & Health Sciences. 2018; 5(10):187-91.
[30]
Azevedo N, Ribeiro JC, Machado L. Balance and posture in children and adolescents: a cross-sectional study. Sensors. 2022; 22(13):1-14.
[31]
Azevedo N, Ribeiro JC, Machado L. Back pain in children and adolescents: a cross-sectional study. European Spine Journal. 2023; 32(9):3280-9.
[32]
Popova-ramova E, Poposka A, Ramov L. School screening for spine deformity with clinical test and spine mouse device. Jokull Journal. 2013; 63(7):97-105.
[33]
Topalidou A, Tzagarakis G, Souvatzis X, Kontakis G, Katonis P. Evaluation of the reliability of a new non-invasive method for assessing the functionality and mobility of the spine. Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics. 2014; 16(1):117-24.
[34]
Ruthard K, Raabe-oetker A, Ruthard J, Oppermann T, Duran I, Schönau E. Reliability of a radiation-free, noninvasive and computer-assisted assessment of the spine in children with cerebral palsy. European Spine Journal. 2020; 29:937-42.
[35]
Okanishi N, Kito N, Akiyama M, Yamamoto M. Spinal curvature and characteristics of postural change in pregnant women. Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 2012; 91(7):856-61.
[36]
Jung SH, Hwang UJ, Kim JH, Ha SM, Kwon OY. Correlation among non-radiological measurements for thoracic kyphosis. Journal of Musculoskeletal Science and Technology. 2020; 4(1):1-5.
[37]
https://www.sigmaelectronica.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/A000005.pdf. Accessed 19 April 2025.
[38]
https://invensense.tdk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/MPU-6000-Datasheet1.pdf. Accessed 19 April 2025.
[39]
Arslan A. Comparative analysis of speed decoding algorithms for rotary incremental encoders. Master's Thesis, School of Electrical Engineering, Aalto University. 2022.
[40]
Khalifa I, Ghazwan A, Mahmood LA. The assessment of spinal alignment based on a computer-assisted electromechanical device. Al-Nahrain Journal for Engineering Sciences. 2024; 27(4):477-85.
[41]
https://www.rajguruelectronics.com/Product/707/HC-06%20core%20bluetooth%20module.pdf. Accessed 19 April 2025.
[42]
Tshiluna NB, Mathevula HL, Rimer S, Pinifolo J, Paul BS, Jayram S, et al. Analysis of bluetooth and wi-fi interference in smart home. In international conference on advances in computing and communication engineering 2016 (pp. 13-8). IEEE.
[43]
Onah CI, Mbamara US, Ebegbulem MM. Design, construction and testing of a solar charged multi-USB power bank using lithium-ion batteries. Journal of Instrumentation Technology & Innovation. 2016; 6(1):61-76.
[44]
https://www.ineltro.ch/media/downloads/SAAItem/45/45958/2b4fb0d5-bfc7-4a45-8c2f-592265c6810f.pdf. Accessed 19 April 2025.
[45]
https://docs.arduino.cc/hardware/nano/. Accessed 19 April 2025.
[46]
https://www.handsontec.com/dataspecs/module/18650-Lithium%20charger.pdf. Accessed 19 April 2025.
[47]
Baran EH, Erbil HY. Surface modification of 3D printed PLA objects by fused deposition modeling: a review. Colloids and Interfaces. 2019; 3(2):1-25.
[48]
Wang J, Zhang J, Xu R, Chen TG, Zhou KS, Zhang HH. Measurement of scoliosis cobb angle by end vertebra tilt angle method. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2018; 13:1-7.
[49]
Gstoettner M, Sekyra K, Walochnik N, Winter P, Wachter R, Bach CM. Inter-and intraobserver reliability assessment of the cobb angle: manual versus digital measurement tools. European Spine Journal. 2007; 16:1587-92.
[50]
Goh S, Price RI, Leedman PJ, Singer KP. The relative influence of vertebral body and intervertebral disc shape on thoracic kyphosis. Clinical Biomechanics. 1999; 14(7):439-48.
[51]
Singer K, Jones TJ, Breidahl PD. A comparison of radiographic and computer-assisted measurements of thoracic and thoracolumbar sagittal curvature. Skeletal Radiology. 1990; 19:21-6.
[52]
Harrison DE, Cailliet R, Harrison DD, Janik TJ, Holland B. Reliability of centroid, cobb, and harrison posterior tangent methods: which to choose for analysis of thoracic kyphosis. Spine. 2001; 26(11):e227-34.
[53]
Morrissy RT, Goldsmith GS, Hall EC, Kehl D, Cowie GH. Measurement of the cobb angle on radiographs of patients who have scoliosis. Evaluation of Intrinsic Error. JBJS. 1990; 72(3):320-7.
[54]
Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine. 2016; 15(2):155-63.
[55]
Woods GN, Huang MH, Lee JH, Cawthon PM, Fink HA, Schousboe JT, et al. Factors associated with kyphosis and kyphosis progression in older men: the MrOS study. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research. 2020; 35(11):2193-8.
[56]
Vaz G, Roussouly P, Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J. Sagittal morphology and equilibrium of pelvis and spine. European Spine Journal. 2002; 11:80-7.
[57]
Fleiss JL. Design and analysis of clinical experiments. John Wiley & Sons; 2011.
[58]
Parent S, Labelle H, Skalli W, Latimer B, De GJ. Morphometric analysis of anatomic scoliotic specimens. Spine. 2002; 27(21):2305-11.