Evaluating the Validity and Reliability of Thoracic and Lumbar Curvature Measurements Using Image Processing Software (IPSO)


Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, East Tehran branch, Islamic Azad university, Tehran, Iran.


The present study aimed to evaluate image processing software (IPSO) for physical abnormalities compared to standard Cobb measurements when measuring thoracic and lumbar curvature. This was a correlational study. The participants included 56 healthy male and female volunteers visiting the radiology centers at Firoozgar and Bahonar hospitals in Tehran with a mean age of 45.2±13.9 years, mean weight of 76.1±12.3 kg, mean height of 1.67±0.13 m, and mean body mass index (BMI) of 27.4 ± 5.7 kg/m2. Before the study, the participants were briefed on the significance, purpose, and process, completed a medical-sports record questionnaire, and consented to participate in the study. Thoracic and lumbar curves were measured using radiography (the Cobb measurement) and image processing software. The results showed that the thoracic (ICC=0.65) and lumbar curve (ICC=0.61) measurement data obtained using the image processing method had moderate validity relative to the Cobb method. Moreover, lumbar (ICC=0.98) and thoracic (ICC=0.96) curves measured with the test-retest software had excellent reliability. The reliability of the thoracic and lumbar curve measurements using the two testers with the image processing software were respectively (ICC=0.91) and (ICC=0.84). The good to excellent reliability and moderate validity of thoracic and lumbar curve measurements using image processing software for physical abnormalities and its ease of use, lower cost, and more features mean that it can be used to examine thoracic and lumbar skeletal deformities.


Main Subjects

  1. Geller PL. Skeletal analysis and theoretical complications. World archaeology. 2005;37(4):597-609.
  2. Moradporian mr, Rahmati m, Fouladvand m. Study of abnormality frequency and its related factors in Khorramabad Azad university students. scientific magazine yafte. 2012;14(4):113-20.
  3. Frobin W, Leivseth G, Biggemann M, Brinckmann P. Sagittal plane segmental motion of the cervical spine. A new precision measurement protocol and normal motion data of healthy adults. Clinical Biomechanics. 2002;17(1):21-31.
  4. Golpayegani M, Mahtabi S, Shahjerdi S, Heydarpour R. The study of validity and reliability of formetric 4D system in measuring of deformites in kyphosis and lordosis in women. Journal of Shahrekord Uuniversity of Medical Sciences. 2013;15.
  5. Toppenberg KS, Hill DA, Miller DP. Safety of radiographic imaging during pregnancy. American family physician. 1999;59(7):1813.
  6. Murray KJ, Le Grande MR, De Mues AO, Azari MF. Characterisation of the correlation between standing lordosis and degenerative joint disease in the lower lumbar spine in women and men: a radiographic study. BMC musculoskeletal disorders. 2017;18(1):1-8.
  7. MohammadZadeh S, Jafarpisheh AS, Mokhtarinia HR, Nourozi ROM. Designing and Evaluating the Validity and Reliability of the Biofeedback Tool for Healthy People With Postural Kyphosis. Archives of Rehabilitation. 2019;19(4):340-53.
  8. Lussu P, Marini E. Ultra close-range digital photogrammetry in skeletal anthropology: A systematic review. PLOS ONE. 2020;15(4):e0230948.
  9. Rajabi R, Latifi S, Minoonejad H, Rajabi F. The effect of soft tissues in measurement of thoracic kyphosis by Iranian kyphometer. Journal of Practical Studies of Biosciences in Sport. 2018;5(10):67-76.
  10. Yousefi M, Ilbiegi S, Naghibi SE, Farjad Pezeshk SA, Zanguee H. Reliability of Body Landmark Analyzer (BLA) system for Measuring Hyperkyphosis and Hyperlordosis Abnormalities. Journal of Advanced Sport Technology. 2020;4(1):20-9.
  11. Fadaee E, Seidi F, Rajabi R. The spinal mouse validity and reliability in measurement of thoracic and lumbar vertebral curvatures. Journal of Shahrekord Uuniversity of Medical Sciences. 2017;19.
  12. Chun S-W, Lim C-Y, Kim K, Hwang J, Chung SG. The relationships between low back pain and lumbar lordosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Spine Journal. 2017;17(8):1180-91.
  13. Parthan A, Evans CJ, Le K. Chronic low back pain: epidemiology, economic burden and patient-reported outcomes in the USA. Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research. 2006;6(3):359-69.
  14. Russell BS. The effect of high-heeled shoes on lumbar lordosis: a narrative review and discussion of the disconnect between Internet content and peer-reviewed literature. Journal of chiropractic medicine. 2010;9(4):166-73.
  15. Boroojerdi MH, Rahimi A, Roostayi MM, Talebian SM, Yousefi M, Shamounian E, et al. Thoracic and Lumbar Sagittal Spinal Curvature Adaptations between Elite Iranian Road and Speed Cyclists. Journal of Biomedical Physics & Engineering. 2021;11(3):297.
  16. Meijer GJ, Homminga J, Hekman EE, Veldhuizen A, Verkerke GJ. The effect of three-dimensional geometrical changes during adolescent growth on the biomechanics of a spinal motion segment. Journal of biomechanics. 2010;43(8):1590-7.
  17. Shirazi SA, Haghighi FM, Alavi SM, Nezhad FF, Emami F. Is application of Kinesio tape to treat hyperlordosis more effective on abdominal muscles or hamstrings? Journal of research in medical sciences: the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. 2018;23.
  18. Babakhani F, Hatefi M, Ashrafizadeh M, Barzegar M. Effect of Eight-week Core Stabilization Exercises on Static and Dynamic Balance Indices in Girls with Hyperlordosis: A Controlled Laboratory Study. International Journal of School Health. 2020;7(4):47-54.
  19. Barrett E, McCreesh K, Lewis J. Reliability and validity of non-radiographic methods of thoracic kyphosis measurement: a systematic review. Manual therapy. 2014;19(1):10-7.
  20. Vrtovec T, Pernuš F, Likar B. A review of methods for quantitative evaluation of spinal curvature. European spine journal. 2009;18(5):593-607.
  21. Russell BS, Muhlenkamp-Wermert KA, Hoiriis KT. Measurement of lumbar Lordosis: a comparison of 2 alternatives to the cobb angle. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 2020;43(8):760-7.
  22. Azadinia F, Kamyab M, Behtash H, Saleh Ganjavian M, Javaheri MR. The validity and reliability of noninvasive methods for measuring kyphosis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2014;27(6):E212-8.
  23. Farahabadi A, Farahabadi I, Rabbani H, Rezvani M. An Automatic Method for Measuring Lumbar Lordosis Angle. Journal Of Isfahan Medical School. 2012;30(200):1-.
  24. Mousavi Sadati SK, Mirkarimpour SH. Physical abnormalities and presentation of corrective movements based on NASM approach. Tehran: Hatmi; 2018. p. 131-47.
  25. Leroux MA, Zabjek K, Simard G, Badeaux J, Coillard C, Rivard CH. A noninvasive anthropometric technique for measuring kyphosis and lordosis: an application for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine. 2000;25(13):1689-94.
  26. Gheitasi M, Bayattork M, Bahmani S. Validity and Reliability of Digital Photogrammetry in Determining the Degrees of ‎Thoracic Hyperkyphosis and Lumbar Hyperlordosis in Iranian Adolescent Girls and ‎Boys. Journal of Paramedical Sciences & Rehabilitation. 2021;10(2):97-106.
  27. Shahri YFK, Hesar NGZ. Validity and reliability of smartphone-based Goniometer-Pro app for measuring the thoracic kyphosis. Musculoskeletal Science and Practice. 2020;49:102216.
  28. Leroux MA, Zabjek K, Simard G, Coillard C, Rivard CH. Estimated kyphosis and lordosis changes at follow-up in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics. 2002;22(1):73-9.
  29. Milanese S, Gordon S, Buettner P, Flavell C, Ruston S, Coe D, et al. Reliability and concurrent validity of knee angle measurement: smart phone app versus universal goniometer used by experienced and novice clinicians. Manual therapy. 2014;19(6):569-74.
  30. Ortiz A, Val S, Delgado D. Reliability and Concurrent Validity of the Goniometer-Pro App vs a Universal Goniometer in determining Passive Flexion of Knee. International Journal of Computer Applications. 2017;975:8887.
  31. Greendale G, Nili N, Huang M-H, Seeger L, Karlamangla A. The reliability and validity of three non-radiological measures of thoracic kyphosis and their relations to the standing radiological Cobb angle. Osteoporosis international. 2011;22(6):1897-905.
  32. Been E, Kalichman L. Lumbar lordosis. The Spine Journal. 2014;14(1):87-97.
  33. Norbakhsh MR, Mosavi SJ. Repeatitive and validity of flexible ruler in measuring lumbar lordosis. Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences. 2002;12(36):46-51.
  34. Mac-Thiong J-M, Pinel-Giroux F-M, de Guise JA, Labelle H. Comparison between constrained and non-constrained Cobb techniques for the assessment of thoracic kyphosis and lumbar lordosis. European Spine Journal. 2007;16(9):1325-31.
  35. Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of chiropractic medicine. 2016;15(2):155-63.
  36. Grindle DM, Mousavi SJ, Allaire BT, White AP, Anderson DE. Validity of flexicurve and motion capture for measurements of thoracic kyphosis vs standing radiographic measurements. JOR Spine. 2020;3(3):e1120.
  37. Sacco IC, Alibert S, Queiroz B, Pripas D, Kieling I, Kimura A, et al. Reliability of photogrammetry in relation to goniometry for postural lower limb assessment. Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy. 2007;11:411-7.
  38. Döhnert MB, Tomasi E. Validity of computed photogrammetry for detecting idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents. Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy. 2008;12:290-7.
  39. Porto AB, Okazaki VH. Thoracic kyphosis and lumbar lordosis assessment by radiography and photogrammetry: a review of normative values and reliability. Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics. 2018;41(8):712-23.
  40. Penha P, Casarotto R, Sacco I, Marques A, João S. Qualitative postural analysis among boys and girls of seven to ten years of age. Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy. 2008;12:386-91.