Subjective and Objective Assessment of the Preferred Rotational Cervical Spine Position in Infants with an Upper Cervical Spine Dysfunction: A Cross-Sectional Study
2024

Assessing Neck Position in Infants with Upper Cervical Spine Dysfunction

Sample size: 69 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Langenfeld Anke, Paravicini Inga, Hobaek Siegenthaler Mette, Wehrli Martina, Häusler Melanie, Bergander Torsten, Schweinhardt Petra

Primary Institution: Department of Chiropractic Medicine, Balgrist University Hospital and University of Zurich

Hypothesis

Can parents accurately assess their infant's cervical spine rotation preference compared to clinician and objective assessments?

Conclusion

Parents' assessments of their infants' cervical spine rotation preferences align well with clinician evaluations, suggesting their input is valuable in clinical assessments.

Supporting Evidence

  • Parents' assessments correlated highly with clinician evaluations (rs = 0.687, p < 0.001).
  • Infants' mean age was 145 days, with a birth weight of 3328 g.
  • 33 infants were assessed as right-preferred and 30 as left-preferred by parents.

Takeaway

This study shows that parents can help doctors understand how their baby's neck is positioned, which is important for treatment.

Methodology

A cross-sectional study involving 69 infants aged three to six months, assessing cervical spine rotation preference through parent and clinician evaluations and objective measurements using inertial measurement units.

Potential Biases

Potential bias due to reliance on subjective assessments from parents and clinicians.

Limitations

All infants were assessed by the same clinician, which may have influenced the outcomes.

Participant Demographics

Infants aged three to six months, with 45 males and 24 females; 58 infants had head asymmetry.

Statistical Information

P-Value

p < 0.001

Confidence Interval

95% CI −0.597–0.737

Statistical Significance

p < 0.001

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.3390/children11121515

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication