Goniometers

Movement is a contributory factor in the procurement of physical therapy to an individual through the assessment of movement of a person from one angle to another; it is possible to top know whatever angles they are going to cover and how to deal with problems that they are facing. Therefore, the movement of a patient is critical to their well-being. In the case of an injury or an accident, individual requires experts who have the proper knowledge in carrying out relevant activities to ensure that they are in the best state of health. Through, the use of related tools, experts get to know whatever contingencies they can put up to help with the definition of a healthy individual (Armstrong et al. 1998). Thus, the use of the Goniometer tool for the assessment of patients in different ways.

A goniometer while used in the medical realm refers to an instrument which helps in the calculation of angles to be rotated at precise positions. Through the toolkit, the medical practitioners get to know of different perspectives that an individual can move. The word has its origin from two Greek words which were fashioned to bring it to being. The Greek words Gonia meaning Angle and Metron meaning measure are brought together to provide a name for the tool which was first described by Gemma Frisius in the year 1538. There are different applications of the tool in the society and it can impact differently on how an individual patient is handled.  It is applied in numerous sectors in the society, but regarding the study; the most relevant application is in the medical field.

 In the medical field, the tool is used for the recording of initial and subsequent movements for different motions. The tool in most cases is used in the offices and stations of disability experts and evaluators. The tool is important in determining the extent of invalidity to an individual. Nonetheless, the tool is also used in the medico-legal areas. The ability to document issues that are presented as well as well as the creation of a look into some of the signs that might lead to a certain condition.

 Physiotherapy employs the use of the tool in determining the progress of their patients and how they should handle the psychical activities related to the patients. The measurement of the joint angles in the body of the patient makes the specialist know whatever activity they should undertake and any interventions that might be helpful to the individual in the course of their business. The measurement of the initial movement made by the patient and subsequent movements reveals the path to recovery for a person as well as an excellent rehabilitation procedure to show that their efforts are bearing fruits. The tool helps the therapists in conducting an analysis of the different joints in the bodies of individual patients, then accessing their various possibilities to revive. Through the use of the tool, a therapist knows whatever intervention will help in creating a real patient progress. A therapist must have comprehensive knowledge of the human anatomy before using the tool. With the tool, one must have a perfect place to measure and put the device on (Armstrong et al. 1998). These target sections of the body will help the therapist to determine whatever motion areas are and what improvements can be made to them.

The use of the tool has different hitches that are recognized by individual testers. Certain errors come with the repetitive measurements. Therefore a provision of between 5 to 10 degrees of error in the tests. Nonetheless, the reliability and accuracy of the tools are intra-tester related. The individual who is handling the tool should have a good system that helps in the creation of a manner of reading. For those persons who have less experience, there are higher chances that they will conduct errors with the tool. For those with a relatively extensive experience, there are lower chances that they will make mistakes using the tools. Thus, there are certain considerations which should be achieved in the reading of statistical data from the machines.

 The goniometers are made in different ways. Different models address the needs of different segment markets. The reliability of the tool, as per certain experts lies in their forms. The universal goniometer, on the other hand, is either plastic or a metal tool with 1-degree enhancements. The arms of the tools can go up to 12 inches to enable them to have a correct imprint on the landmarks for measurement. In the modern times, on the other hand, certain additions have been made to the tradition goniometers. The traditional tools have been enhanced by the creation of a technological platform help with the efficiency of the tools. The inventions of smartphones have enabled the creation of applications that perform like the goniometer. Some of these applications include the Goniometer pro and the knee Goniometer. These applications utilize the in-built accelerometers in mobile phones to help estimate the angles of the measured joints. These tools have ben of huge aid and improvement to the traditional goniometer as they function in a similar accuracy and model to the universal goniometer.

Reliability: In most cases, reliability refers to the ability of the tool producing consistent results over a period. The reliability of the tool is crucial on carrying out activities that will be of great benefit to the development of good results for the therapy. Thus, it is instrumental to consider the reliability of the goniometer.

In a study conducted by Jones et al. (2014), the reliability of the machine against the reliability of the goniometer app was tested in different ways. The reliability of the machines was tested in a sample population of 36 volunteers who came up to help with the testing of the reliability of the instrumental that makes it easier to identify and create better ways to helps the patients in motion, The mean age of participants who were involved in the study was 60.6 years. The participants performed different movements in the assessments and made it easier for them to know whatever activity they would do next (Brosseau et al. 2001). These activities were programmed to help with the establishments of the reliability of the results from the two kinds of goniometers. The universal goniometer was utilized for this model also to help with the establishment of its results. The two different kinds of goniometers had no much difference in the results that they pushed across. However, the goniometer application in the phone was greatly reliable in comparison to the universal goniometer (Jones et al. 2014). There were Pearson correlations of 0.96-0.98, while there were also intra-class correlations of 0.97-0.99.  This showed that there was a high confidence rate in the results of the devices. The standard errors from the processes were low. Thus it could be simpler to use the apparatus in determining different issues within the society. Through the goniometer, it is established that the two apparatus had a greatly positive nature, which depended heavily on the individuals who were performing the procedure (Jonsson & Johnson, 2001). Through the skill that a doctor possessed, the reliability and accuracy of the instrumentals changed considerably.

In a different study which was conducted by Milanese et al. (2014), the intra and intertester reliability of the Universal Goniometer and the Goniometer application was assessed in between students and trained individuals (Milanese et al. 2014). The assessment was conducted by the evaluation of the measurements of the two groups to determine the individual differences in the measurements. In both instances, the results were greatly reliable but there as a difference in the results which were provided from one group to another. These results showed that the handling of the devices is instrumental in the foundation of better results for the patients and a greater accuracy in the management of the issues presented.

The reliability of different kinds of goniometers used do not pass the 5 degrees mark. Therefore, most of the tools are having a high confidence level in whatever they carry out. This is regardless of whatever tool as applied to the function. The use of different individuals, on the other hand, brought about different marks in the machines. These differences were instructional in the development of even greater reliability tests. The goniometer tests highly when it comes to reliability, and at the same time, it has a great consistency from one measurement to another when used by a person.

Validity:  Validity of an instrument shows the degree to which it measures whatever it was meant to do. This indicates that the tool conducts a measurement of whatever it was required to do to help with the development of even better results.

There are different instruments which are used in physiotherapy to ensure that the joints of a patient are measured. The use of different goniometers affect the results of the same. Therefore, the validity and accuracy of whatever is intended to be measured are highly dependent on the individual practices that are adopted (Jones et al. 2014). The use of the universal goniometer reveals that there are minimal errors in the measurement of different body parts. These results bring out the underlying zero errors, and with well-trained practitioners, the errors are at some levels reduced to significant portions. Therefore, it is notable that the zero mistakes that are accrued are due to differences that are arrived at in the creation of a better way to approach the issues that are pertinent to the measurements.

 In examining the validity of the Universal goniometers, other tools are used to show some extent of accuracy in the measurements. The use of the radiographs to demonstrate the accuracy of the tools is an instructional way to determine the different issues dealing with the validity of the data. The PG revealed an excellent validity of information. This was tested in the knee joints where different movements were measured. The Universal Goniometer (UG), on the other hand, showed a high vilify of results in the extension positions of the joint (Brosseau et al. 2001). This shows that the different tools have different areas where they are highly valid compared to others. The validity of the instruments is exhibited in how they carry out their duties and the deliverance of even better ways to determine the values of the positions. Through these tools, clinicians will have the capability of determining the rightful angels to which a motion should be conducted and in carrying out follow-up activities for those in therapy.