4. Discussion
The aim of this study was to provide, inter and intra - observer, and test - retest reliability and validity measurements for shoulder internal and external rotation assessment, measured with two low-cost mobile apps (MyROM and OnForm). The results showed that reliability was excellent (perfect or almost perfect) in all tests performed for both apps, except for inter-observer reliability, which was from good to (almost) perfect in both methods. The MyROM validity results were also perfect. Consequently, the measurement repetitions with the two apps can be considered reliable and valid and its use can be considered safe and adequate for the measurement of the glenohumeral ROM (internal and external rotation).
Even though some existing articles already reviewed the measurement of ROM with mobile apps for some joints, specific studies of the glenohumeral ROM with this kind of tool are scarce. The absence of studies on reliability and validity tests of mobile apps for shoulder ROM prevents the opportunity of using a valuable and practical tool for the assessment of athletes and other types of patients. This study promotes the inclusion of these apps in the day-to-day clinical shoulder evaluation, being one of the first to provide intra- and inter-observer reliability and validity measurements[
5].
Other studies that tested intra - observer reliability of different types of goniometers, like the one guided by laser (HALO), obtained results that varied from 0.82 to 0.91 which are considered as excellent values. This was also compared to the universal goniometer which had an excellent result, with variations of the ICC from 0.83 to 0.95. Among these 3 methods, the MyROM and OnForm applications turned out to be the most reliable according to the ICC values [
12].
Another study compared a manual goniometer (Lafayette) and an iPhone© app (Knee goniometer) and obtained an intra-observer reliability of 0.927 for the manual goniometer and 0.982 for the mobile app. This indicates that the reliability for the mobile app goniometers is generally excellent, including MyROM and OnForm, as they all rank at excellent correlation levels [
13].
Most of the studies check the reliability of different goniometers comparing them with the UG, especially in knee extension and flexion tests. Pearson's r results were > 0.91 (strong correlation) for the UG and of 0.83 - 0.94 (strong correlation) for the DI [
14]. This gives us an idea of how the digital measurements can be as reliable as the manual gold standard.
A similar study in 2012 found that the DI was more reliable than the UG, obtaining Pearson's r of 0.69 - 0.89 and 0.46 - 0.55, respectively. Two other apps have been studied with this type of test, iGoniometer and the Knee Goniometer app (KGA). The former obtained a Pearson's r of 0.93 (strong correlation) and the latter of 0.92 (strong correlation). Compared to the results of this study, a similarity can be observed between the other mobile applications and the results obtained with OnForm and MyROM [
12,
14].
The OnForm app has been validated in previous studies. When comparing data obtained from the My ROM app (n=392) and taking the OnForm as the “gold standard”, there was an excellent ICC for both internal and external rotation (ICC of 0.919 and 0.880, respectively). Therefore, the My ROM app is can be considered a valid tool to evaluated glenohumeral rotation.
A study evaluated the validity of an application called The Simple Goniometer app against the UG with a positive Pearson's r correlation >0.96, which made The Simple Goniometer app valid [
14]. Compared to My ROM, it has a slightly higher correlation (both fall into the category of strong correlation), but it should be taken into account that it was performed to measure knee flexion and the measurements were performed by a single observer although they were later evaluated by two assistants [
14].
Certain advantages and disadvantages of the applications used in this study should be mentioned: the ROM in internal rotation with the My ROM application does not allow a good fixation of the coracoid process, which means that each observer using a different force or technique could obtain different data. This also causes the degrees of internal rotation to be higher with My ROM versus OnForm. Another disadvantage of the My ROM is that it depends on the size of the cell phone, depending on how awkward it is to place on the forearm. Also, My ROM does not provide as much personalized attention as the OnForm. On the other hand, the My ROM application gives you the results immediately and lists them in a perfectly ordered table, providing immediate feedback to both the clinician and the patient so that decisions can be made in a very straight forward manner in the same appointment. In addition, outcomes are shared online so that they are available anywhere.
Future research should aim to evaluate cheaper and more practical systems in specific joints and their implementation in today’s athletes assessment.