Cited by 32Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal DisordersMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationOrthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

Quantitative measurements of forward head posture in a clinical settings: a technical feasibility study

Mani, Suresh, Sharma, Shobha, Omar, Baharuddin, Ahmad, Kartini, Muniandy, Yughdtheswari, Singh, Devinder Kaur Ajit·2017·European Journal of Physiotherapy

Abstract

Introduction: Current clinical practice lacks a user-friendly quantitative method of measuring head posture in individuals with neck-related musculoskeletal disorders. Literature reveals that photogrammetry is a valid and reliable method to evaluate forward head posture (FHP) based on the angles and distance measured on a digital image. However, the adoption of the photogrammetry-based FHP assessment is not common clinical practice. This may be due to technical difficulties, high cost, and complexity of posture assessment software. Advancements in and access to information technology have allowed wide numbers of open resource software applications to be available for measurement of FHP in patients with neck pain in the clinical setting.Aim: To determine the technical feasibility of quantitative forward head posture assessment in clinical settings.Methods: A total of 15 subjects without history of neck pain and 16 subjects with neck pain were recruited for the study. Sagittal head tilt angle (SHA), craniocervical angle (CCA), and shoulder angle (SA) were measured using photogrammetry method. Angles on digital images taken were then analysed using a multi-professional open resource, the Web Plot Digitizer (WPD).Results: The CCA and SA were lower (CCA = 43.54°, SA = 49.39°) in subjects with neck pain than normal subjects (CCA = 47.43°, SA = 52.28°) indicating FHP and protracted shoulder. Subjects with neck pain demonstrated high sagittal head tilt angle (SHA = 19.89°) indicating greater upper cervical extension.Conclusion: Quantitative FHP assessment in the clinical setup using photogrammetry is technically feasible with a basic computer setup and WPD to measure the angles on a digital image.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/21679169.2017.1296888

Cites

37 of 37 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
Mani, S., Sharma, S., Omar, B., Ahmad, K., Muniandy, Y., & Singh, D. K. A.
Affiliations
National University of Malaysia (MY)
Corresponding author
Sharma, Shobha
Venue
European Journal of Physiotherapy
Published
2017-03-07
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
119-123
ISSN
  • 2167-9169 (ISSN-L)
  • 2167-9177
OpenAlex
W2593763062
Cited by
32
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3
FWCI
2.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
European Journal of Physiotherapy (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Orthodontics › Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Keywords
forward head posture, photogrammetry, neck pain, craniocervical angle, shoulder angle

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