preprint · F1000Research
<ns3:p> The role of posture in spinal pain is unclear which might be linked to characteristics of postural outcome measures. This systematic scoping review mapped the clinical utility of postural outcome tools for spinal pain. Following Joanna Briggs Institute framework, twelve bibliographic databases were searched until 8 <ns3:sup>th</ns3:sup> August 2023. Article selection, characterisation/mapping and synthesis using qualitative content analysis were performed by two independent reviewers. Clinical utility was defined by psychometric and clinimetric criteria. 85 eligible studies were identified from 89 publications. Twenty-eight distinct postural outcome tools plus bespoke measures were identified. Most tools were sophisticated computer-based electronic devices or complex time-consuming questionnaires, with limited applicability in non-occupational settings. Clinical utility domains most achieved were construct validity and inter/intra-rater reliability. Tools being underpinned by the biopsychosocial model of pain, sensitivity to clinical change, and predictive validity were the least achieved. Tools had limited clinical utility and were based on postural-structural-biomechanical pain model. </ns3:p>
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.160172.1
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
