The reliability of spinal motion palpation determination of the location of the stiffest spinal site is influenced by confidence ratings: a secondary analysis of three studies

Table 3 Mean Absolute Examiner Differences (cm and VE), and associated ICC (2,1) values

N	Subset, N	MeanAED, cm	Range, cm	MeanAED, VE	Range, VE	ICC(2,1)	SEM (cm)	Rating
Cervical spine
27	All subjects	1.3	0.0–3.2	0.7	0.0–1.8	0.60 (0.30, 0.80)	1.1	Good
21	Both examiners confident	1.2	0.0–3.2	0.7	0.0–1.8	0.66 (0.35, 0.85)	1.0	Good
6	≥1 examiner not confident	1.8	0.8–2.6	1.0	0.4–1.4	0.42 (0.00, 0.89)^a	1.3	Fair
Thoracic spine
52	All subjects	4.0	0.0–14.8	1.7	0.0–6.4	0.31 (0.05, 0.54)	3.9	Poor
21	Both examiners confident	2.0	0.2–7.5	0.9	0.1–3.3	0.83 (0.63, 0.93	1.9	Excellent
21	One examiner not confident	4.5	0.0–14.8	2.0	0.0–6.4	0.00 (0.00, 0.28)^a	4.3	Poor
10	No examiners confident	7.1	1.4–14.6	3.1	0.6–6.3	0.00 (0.00, 0.28)^a	4.3	Poor
Lumbar spine
34	All subjects	2.6	0.2–7.1	0.7	0.1–1.8	0.39 (0.06, 0.64)	2.3	Poor
19	Both examiners confident	2.4	0.2–7.0	0.6	0.1–1.8	0.09 (0.00, 0.52)^a	2.2	Poor
15	≥1 examiner not confident	2.9	0.0–7.1	0.7	0.0–1.8	0.52 (0.03, 0.81)	2.5	Fair
Combined dataset
113	All subjects	Intentionally blank		1.2	0.0–6.4	Intentionally blank
61	Both examiners confident			0.7	0.1–1.8
36	1 examiner confident			1.5	0.0–6.4
16	No examiners confident			2.1	0.0–6.3

Abbreviations: MeanAED Mean Absolute Examiner Differences, VE vertebral equivalent, ICC intraclass correlation, SEM standard error of measurement
^aNegative ICC value reported as 0.00

ISSN: 2045-709X