Cited by 17Scoliosis diagnosis and treatmentLower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesErgonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders

Reproducibility of Sagittal Pelvic Tilt Measurements in Normal Subjects Using Digital Inclinometry

Prushansky, Tamara, Ezra, Noa, Kurse, Naama, Man, Lotem, Schneiderman, Yael·2008·Gait & Posture

Abstract

Standing sagittal pelvic tilt posture is widely assessed qualitatively, yet no efficient non-invasive quantitatively method is available for measuring pelvic tilt position or its amplitude. The main objective of the current study was to assess the intra- and inter-tester reproducibility of digital inclinometry-based (DI) measurements of pelvic tilt in healthy subjects. Pelvic inclination was measured while standing in neutral position (NP), maximal anterior pelvic tilt (APT) and maximal posterior pelvic tilt (PPT) which served for calculating the total pelvic tilt (TPT) range of motion (TPT=PPT-APT). On two separate test occasions two convenience samples of healthy women and men (N=15 in each) were each measured by two different testers. In both groups the intra-tester reproducibility indices of NP, APT, PPT and TPT were acceptable as revealed by high and significant ICCs and low standard error of measurements (SEM). In women the inter-tester reproducibility indices, of the same variables, were high as distinguished by no significant differences between testers and high and significant ICCs. In men, significant differences were found in APT and PPT but the between-testers TPT scores were similar. Collectively these findings indicate that pelvic inclinometry yields acceptable reproducibility which in the light of the facility of the method may render it an efficient clinical tool.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.01.015

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Prushansky, T., Ezra, N., Kurse, N., Man, L., & Schneiderman, Y.
Affiliations
Tel Aviv University (IL)
Venue
Gait & Posture
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-10
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
513-516
ISSN
0966-6362 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2019917530
Cited by
17
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Gait & Posture (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Scoliosis diagnosis and treatment
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
Keywords
reproducibility, intertester reliability, intra-rater reliability, anterior pelvic tilt, posterior pelvic tilt, standing posture, sex differences
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Pelvis, Posture, Sacrum, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review