Test - re-test reliability and concurrent validity of cervical active range of motion in young asymptomatic adults using a new inertial measurement unit device

Head-Mounted Display for Clinical Evaluation of Neck Movement Validation with Meta Quest 2

Neck disorders have a significant impact on people because of their high incidence. The head-mounted display (HMD) systems, such as Meta Quest 2, grant access to immersive virtual reality (iRV) experiences. This study aims to validate the Meta Quest 2 HMD system as an alternative for screening neck movement in healthy people. The device provides data about the position and orientation of the head and, thus, the neck mobility around the three anatomical axes. The authors develop a VR application that solicits participants to perform six neck movements (rotation, flexion, and lateralization on both sides), which allows the collection of corresponding angles. An InertiaCube3 inertial measurement unit (IMU) is also attached to the HMD to compare the criterion to a standard. The mean absolute error (MAE), the percentage of error (%MAE), and the criterion validity and agreement are calculated. The study shows that the average absolute errors do not exceed 1° (average = 0.48 ± 0.09°). The rotational movement's average %MAE is 1.61 ± 0.82%. The head orientations obtain a correlation between 0.70 and 0.96. The Bland-Altman study reveals good agreement between the HMD and IMU systems. Overall, the study shows that the angles provided by the Meta Quest 2 HMD system are valid to calculate the rotational angles of the neck in each of the three axes. The obtained results demonstrate an acceptable error percentage and a very minimal absolute error when measuring the degrees of neck rotation; therefore, the sensor can be used for screening neck disorders in healthy people.

Reliability of a Wearable Motion Tracking System for the Clinical Evaluation of a Dynamic Cervical Spine Function

Neck pain is a common cause of disability worldwide. Lack of objective tools to quantify an individual's functional disability results in the widespread use of subjective assessments to measure the limitations in spine function and the response to interventions. This study assessed the reliability of the quantifying neck function using a wearable cervical motion tracking system. Three novice raters recorded the neck motion assessments on 20 volunteers using the device. Kinematic features from the signals in all three anatomical planes were extracted and used as inputs to repeated measures and mixed-effects regression models to calculate the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Cervical spine-specific kinematic features indicated good and excellent inter-rater and intra-rater reliability for the most part. For intra-rater reliability, the ICC values varied from 0.85 to 0.95, and for inter-rater reliability, they ranged from 0.7 to 0.89. Overall, velocity measures proved to be more reliable compared to other kinematic features. This technique is a trustworthy tool for evaluating neck function objectively. This study showed the potential for cervical spine-specific kinematic measurements to deliver repeatable and reliable metrics to evaluate clinical performance at any time points.

A novel virtual reality application for autonomous assessment of cervical range of motion: development and reliability study

Background

Neck pain, one of the most common musculoskeletal diseases, affects 222 million people worldwide. The cervical range of motion (CROM) is a tool used to assess the neck's state across three movement axes: flexo-extension, rotation, and lateral flexion. People with neck pain often have a reduced CROM, and they feel pain at the end-range and/or accompany neck movements with compensatory trunk movements. Virtual reality (VR) setups can track the movement of the head and other body parts in order to create the sensation of immersion in the virtual environment. Using this tracking position information, a CROM assessment can be performed using a VR setup that may be carried out autonomously from the user's home. The objectives of this study were to develop a VR experience that could be used to perform a CROM assessment, and to evaluate the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of the CROM measures guided by this VR experience. To the best of our knowledge, a study of this type has not been carried out before.

Materials & Methods

A total of 30 asymptomatic adults were assessed using a VR device (HTC Vive Pro Eye™). Two raters provided support with the VR setup, and the participants were guided by the VR experience as they performed the movements. Each rater tested each subject twice, in random order. In addition to a head-mounted display (HMD), a tracker located on the subject's back was used to measure trunk compensatory movements. The CROM was estimated using only the HMD position and this measurement was corrected using the tracker data. The mean and standard deviation were calculated to characterize the CROM. To evaluate the reliability, the interclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated for intra-rater and inter-rater analysis. The standard error of measurement and minimum detectable change were also calculated. The usability of the VR system was measured using the Spanish version of the System Usability Scale.

Results

The mean CROM values in each axis of movement were compatible with those described in the literature. ICC values ranged between 0.86 and 0.96 in the intra-rater analysis and between 0.83 and 0.97 in the inter-rater analysis; these values were between good and excellent. When applying the correction of the trunk movements, both the intra-rater and inter-rater ICC values slightly worsened except in the case of the lateral flexion movement, where they slightly improved. The usability score of the CROM assessment/VR system was 86 points, which is an excellent usability score.

Conclusion

The reliability of the measurements and the usability of the system indicate that a VR setup can be used to assess CROM. The reliability of the VR setup can be affected by slippage of the HMD or tracker. Both slippage errors are additive, i.e., only when the sum of these two errors is less than the compensatory movement do the measurements improve when considering the tracker data.