Skip to main content

Advertisement

Supplementary addendum to “Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review”; Reliability of the Spinal Mouse in adult back pain sufferers

Article metrics

The Review to this article has been published in Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders 2017 12:30

We would like to provide an update for the paper “Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review” in Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders [1] with additional data regarding the reliability of the Spinal Mouse method in evaluating global sagittal balance through trunk inclination in an adult population with back pain.

We were alerted to the presence of additional data [2] fitting the inclusion criteria documenting excellent intra-rater reliability (ICC 0.845 [CI 0.679–0.925], SEM 0.803°) of the Spinal Mouse system in a population of 50 adults with back pain aged 58.4 ± 13.4 years. This reliability data is consistent with the reported results in healthy children and healthy adults.

Tables 1 and 2 are updated as below.

Table 1 Methodological quality of included studies evaluated using the Brink and Louw critical appraisal tool
Table 2 Study characteristics, reliability, validity and SEM data of included studies

References

  1. 1.

    Cohen L, Kobayashi S, Simic M, Dennis S, Refshauge K, Pappas E. Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review. Scoliosis Spinal Disord. 2017;12(1):30.

  2. 2.

    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 Bioeng Biomech. 2014;16(1):117–24.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Dr. Topalidou for alerting us to the presence of the additional data.

Funding

No funding was received for the preparation and submission of this research report.

Availability of data and materials

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Author information

LC, SK, MS, SD, KR and EP were involved in the conception of the original study, design of the study and helped to draft the manuscript. LC, SK and EP were involved with the database searches, record screening and article review process. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Correspondence to Larry Cohen.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark