Feasibility, reliability and validity of self-measurement of knee range-of-motion using an accelerometer-based smartphone application by patients with total knee arthroplasty
Eleanor Shuxian Chew,Ee-Lin Woon,Juanita Krysten Miao-Shi Low,Luke Jonathan Haseler,Ismahfaris Ismail,Muhammad Bukhari Alif,Yu-Heng Kwan,John Wei-Ming Tan,Samantha Shi-Man Koh,Hee-Nee Pang,Jerry Delphi Yongqiang Chen,Seng-Jin Yeo,Shi-Ying Lim,Celia Ia-Choo Tan,Yong-Hao Pua
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307219
IF: 3.7
2024-10-03
PLoS ONE
Abstract:Aims: Limited knee range-of-motion (ROM) is common following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). It is associated with functional limitations and patient dissatisfaction. Regular knee ROM assessment is important but accurate testing traditionally requires timely access to trained healthcare professionals. Although accelerometer-based smartphone goniometry has shown to provide reliable and valid joint angles, current evidence of its use still positions healthcare providers as end users instead of patients themselves. Therefore, to maximize the impact of smartphone goniometry on post-TKA care, our study aimed to examine the feasibility, reliability, and validity of patients' self-measurement of knee ROM using an accelerometer-based smartphone goniometry application. Methods: Patients were given standard instructions with a practice trial before the actual measurements. Passive knee flexion and extension ROM was measured on 2 sessions in 30 patients with TKA using 4 block-randomized methods: (i) smartphone self-assessment, (ii) long-arm goniometry by physiotherapist, (iii) smartphone assessment by physiotherapist, and (iv) extendable-arm goniometry by physiotherapist with placement adjudication. Feasibility was assessed by the number of participants who could independently perform the self-measurement. To assess intra- and inter-session reliability, we computed intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) from random-effects models. To assess intra- and inter-session agreement, we computed mean absolute differences (MADs) and minimum detectable change (MDC). To assess concurrent validity, we designated extendable-arm goniometry as the "gold standard" and compared other methods against it using ICCs and MADs. Results: All patients were able to comprehend and execute the assessment. 87% (n = 26) found the application easy to administer. Smartphone goniometry by patients showed excellent intra- and inter-session reliability (ICCs>0.97) and minimum variability (MAD = 0.9°-3.9°; MDC95 = 3.1°-9.0°). Smartphone or long-arm goniometry by physiotherapists did not outperform patients' self-assessment (ICC = 0.96-0.99, MAD = 0.7°-3.1°; MDC95 = 2.2°-8.0°). Compared against extendable-arm goniometry, smartphone goniometry by patients measured knee flexion and extension ROM with a MAD of 4.5° (ICC, 0.97) and 2.2° (ICC = 0.98), respectively. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that smartphone goniometry is feasible, reliable and accurate, and can be used with confidence in the self-assessment of knee ROM post-TKA. Future studies should further explore its utility in telemonitored rehabilitation, and its possible integration into mobile health applications to enhance accessibility to care following TKA.