Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Dec 2;20(12):1723-1731.
doi: 10.26603/001c.147174. eCollection 2025.

Reliability Analysis of In-person and Virtual Goniometric Measurements for Select Shoulder and Forearm Motions

Affiliations

Reliability Analysis of In-person and Virtual Goniometric Measurements for Select Shoulder and Forearm Motions

Autumn Whitson et al. Int J Sports Phys Ther. .

Abstract

Background: Previous research on upper extremity range of motion has compared in-person to virtual measures for sagittal plane motions (flexion/extension) showing good-excellent reliability. Since upper extremity evaluation includes motion in all planes, it is important to assess whether transverse plane motion (rotation, supination, pronation) can be reliably measured during a virtual assessment.

Purpose: To evaluate the reliability (test/re-test inter-rater and intra-rater) of goniometric measurements of shoulder internal rotation and forearm pronation/supination obtained in-person and virtually.

Study design: Observational cohort, Reliability study.

Methods: Subjects 18-60 years of age with no upper extremity injuries were recruited for range of motion (ROM) testing in a standing position with measurements performed with a standard goniometer. Shoulder internal rotation was measured using the Hand-Behind-the-Back method and forearm pronation/supination were measured with shoulder adducted to the body and elbow flexed. Before in-person measurements were obtained, a static image of end range was captured using a mobile device with a camera. Within 10 days of the in-person measurements, clinicians measured the range of motion on the static image using the same standard goniometric methods as the in-person measurements. Inter-rater and intra-rater reliability were determined via intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC) at the 90% and 95% confidence level.

Results: The inter-rater reliability (ICC≥0.94) and intra-rater reliability (ICC≥0.91) for all in-person and virtual measurements were classified as excellent (SEM: 0.79-1.74°, MDC90: 2.12-4.06°, MDC95: 2.20-4.82°). When combining the three examiners' measurements for each motion, there was a statistically significant difference between in-person and virtual internal rotation (77.5±9.0° vs. 75.3±9.0°, p=0.001). The only statistically significant difference found between examiners occurred for the in-person measurement of pronation (examiner 3: 3.9° greater compared to examiner 1, p=0.044).

Conclusion: Virtual assessment compared to in-person goniometric measurements showed excellent inter- and intra-rater reliabilities (ICC >0.75). This suggests clinicians trained in goniometry can utilize this technique either in person or on a virtual platform. Level of Evidence 3b.

Keywords: goniometer; range of motion; reliability; virtual.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding this manuscript.

Figures

A person with her hand on her back AI-generated content may be incorrect.
Figure 1.. The internal rotation hand behind-the-back angle depicted between the forearm and a vertical line.
A person measuring a person's waist AI-generated content may be incorrect.
Figure 2.. Internal rotation hand behind-the-back angle measured using the bubble goniometer.
A person holding a pen AI-generated content may be incorrect.
Figure 3.. Position for pronation measurement.
A person holding a metal object AI-generated content may be incorrect.
Figure 4.. Position for supination measurement.

References

    1. Validity and reliability of the GYKO inertial sensor system for the assessment of the elbow range of motion. Santospagnuolo A., Bruno A. A., Pagnoni A.., et al. 2019J Sports Med Phys Fit. 59:1466–1471. doi: 10.23736/s0022-4707.19.09331-9. https://doi.org/10.23736/s0022-4707.19.09331-9 - DOI - PubMed
    1. The smartphone inclinometer: A new tool to determine elbow range of motion? Vauclair F., Aljurayyan A., Abduljabbar F. H.., et al. 2017Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 28:415–421. doi: 10.1007/s00590-017-2058-x. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-017-2058-x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Intrarater agreement of elbow extension range of motion in the upper limb neurodynamic test 1 using a smartphone application. Cruz J., Morais N. 2016Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 97:1880–1886. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.05.001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2016.05.001 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Accuracy and reliability of observational motion analysis in identifying shoulder symptoms. Hickey B. W., Milosavljevic S., Bell M. L., Milburn P. D. 2007Man Ther. 12:236–270. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2006.05.005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2006.05.005 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Accuracy and inter-observer reliability of visual estimation compared to clinical goniometry of the elbow. Blonna D., Zarkadas P. C., Fitzsimmons J. S., O'Driscoll S. W. 2011Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 20:1378–1385. doi: 10.1007/s00167-011-1720-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1720-9 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources