Measurement properties of instruments for assessment of cervical spine function in infants with torticollis: a systematic review
The aim of this study was to systematically review the measurement properties of instruments which assess cervical spine function in infants with torticollis. Electronic searches were performed in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library, combining three constructs (‘torticollis’, ‘cervical spine assessment’ and ‘measurement properties’). Two reviewers independently rated the methodological quality and the quality of measurement properties of identified articles, using both the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments) checklist and quality criteria for measurement properties. Five studies, using six instruments, met the inclusion criteria and were analysed. Included instruments were the goniometer, electronic pendular goniometer, protractor, still photography, Muscle Function Scale and a range of motion limitation scale. All studies assessed reliability, and one study also assessed content validity and hypothesis testing. The methodological quality of the studies varied from poor to excellent according to the COSMIN checklist. Two instruments were found to have good measurement properties from high-quality studies: still photography for the assessment of habitual head tilt in supine and the Muscle Function Scale for the assessment of side-flexor muscle function in lateral head righting.
What is known?
• A thorough assessment of the infant presenting with torticollis is essential, in order to correctly diagnose, rule out ‘red flags’ and manage appropriately
• Assessment tools need to have robust measurement properties in order to be of value for clinical practice and research
What is new?
• This systematic review identified two valid and reliable tools for the assessment of cervical spine function in infants with torticollis
• Further research is required to assess the measurement properties of tools already described in the literature and to develop further tools for use in infants with torticollis
KeywordsTorticollis Cervical spine Assessment Measurement properties Systematic review
Congenital muscular torticollis
COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments
Health-related patient-reported outcomes
Minimal important change
Range of motion
Smallest detectable change
Standard error of measurement
AS, HF and DM conceived the research idea and developed the protocol; AS did the database searches; AS and HF screened studies for eligibility; AS performed data extraction; AS and HF performed COSMIN assessment and DM arbitrated in the case of disagreement; AS drafted the manuscript; All authors contributed to the manuscript and approved the final version for publication.
This study was funded by the Temple Street Foundation (grant number 13.032).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- 3.Antonaci F, Ghirmai S, Bono G, Nappi G (2000) Current methods for cervical spine movement evaluation: a review. Clin Exp Rheumatol 18:S-45Google Scholar
- 5.Barske E, Draeger D, Keck K (2014) Comparison of 2-dimensonal and 3-dimensional motion analysis to measure infant cervical range of motion. Wisconsin physical therapy association, Wisconsin, USAGoogle Scholar
- 9.Chen TMK (1995) Infantile muscular torticollis: efficacy of conservative treatment with active programme and manual stretching. Chapter 4: pilot study on the measurement of passive rotation of the neck. Master of Philosophy Dissertation, Chinese University of Hong Kong (personal communication)Google Scholar
- 15.Christensen C, Landsettle A, Antoszewski S, Ballard B, Carey H, Pax Lowes L (2013) ConservaPhys Occup Ther Pediatrtive management of congenital muscular torticollis: an evidence-based algorithm and preliminary treatment parameter recommendations. 33:453–466Google Scholar
- 23.Giray E, Karadag-Saygi E, Mansiz-Kaplan B, Tokgoz D, Bayindir O, Kayhan O (2017) A randomised, single-blinded pilot study evaluating the effects of kinesiology taping and the tape application techniques in addition to therapeutic exercises in the treatment of congenital muscular torticollis. Clin Rehabil 31:1098–1106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Hald ES, Hertle RW, Yang D (2011) Application of a digital head-posture measuring system in children. Am J Ophthalmol 151:66–70, 70.e2Google Scholar
- 25.Hautopp L, Wester S, Bang B, Buus L, Grindsted J, Christensen K, Vinther A (2014) Benefit of physiotherapeutic treatment in children with torticollis. Dan Med J 61:A4970Google Scholar
- 27.Herman MJ (2006) Torticollis in infants and children: common and unusual causes. Instr Course Lect 55:647–653Google Scholar
- 28.Hylton N (1997) Infants with torticollis: the relationship between asymmetric head and neck positioning and postural development. Phys Occ Ther Ped 17:91–117Google Scholar
- 30.Jung AY, Kang EY, Lee SH, Nam DH, Cheon JH, Kim HJ (2015) Factors that affect the rehabilitation duration in patients with congenital muscular torticollis. Ann Rehabil Med 39:18–24Google Scholar
- 36.Lal S, Abbasi AS, Jamro S (2011) Response of primary torticollis to physiotherapy. J Surg Pak (Intl) 16:153–156Google Scholar
- 39.Lee JY, Koh SE, Lee IS, Jung H, Lee J, Kang JI, Bang H (2013) The cervical range of motion as a factor affecting outcome in patients with congenital muscular torticollis. Ann Rehabil Med 37:183–90Google Scholar
- 41.Lewandowski J, Szulc P (2003) The range of motion of the cervical spine in children aged from 3 to 7 years-an electrogoniometric study. Folia Morphol (Warsz) 62:459–461Google Scholar
- 42.Luxford B, Hale L, Piggott J (2009) The physiotherapy management of infants with congenital muscular torticollis: a survey of current practice in New Zealand. N Z J Physiother 37:127–135Google Scholar
- 45.Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, De Vet HC (2010) The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res 19:539–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 54.Öhman AM, Nilsson S, Beckung E (2010) Stretching treatment for infants with congenital muscular torticollis: physiotherapist or parents? A randomised pilot study. Phys Med Rehabil 2:1073–1079Google Scholar
- 56.Öhman AM, Mårdbrink EL, Orefelt C, Seager A, Tell L, Klackenberg E (2013) The physical therapy assessment and management of infants with congenital muscular torticollis: a survey and suggested assessment protocol for congenital muscular torticollis. J Nov Physiother 3:165Google Scholar
- 57.Oledzka MM, Kaplan SL, Sweeney JK, Coulter C, Evans-Rogers DL (2018) Interrater and intrarater reliability of the congenital muscular torticollis severity classification system. Pediatr Phys Ther 30:176–182Google Scholar
- 60.Petronic I, Brdar R, Cirovic D, Nikolic D, Lukac M, Janic D, Pavicevic P, Golubovic Z, Knezevic T (2010) Congenital muscular torticollis in children: distribution, treatment duration and outcome, Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 46:153–158Google Scholar
- 67.Seager A (2017) Assessment and management of torticollis in infancy: a survey of current physiotherapy practice. Physiother Prac Res 38:59–66Google Scholar
- 81.Zachman ZJ, Traina AD, Keating JJ, Bolles ST, Braun-Porter L (1989) Inter-examiner reliability and concurrent validity of two instruments for the measurement of cervical ranges of motion. J Manip Physiol Ther 12:205–210Google Scholar