Objective: We provide a meta-analysis for clinicians and researchers regarding reliability and validity of rasterstereographic measurement of the spinal posture.
Method: A comprehensive PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) literature search identified 19 eligible studies evaluating reliability and validity of static rasterstereographic measurements in healthy subjects and patients with different spinal pathologies.
Results: Our meta-analysis suggests that rasterstereography is a reliable and valid instrument to assess spinal posture parameters, especially thoracic kyphosis, lumbar lordosis, and scoliosis, reliability overall effect sizes rs > .91, ps < .001, validity overall effect sizes rs > 70, ps < .001, when compared to traditional radiological imaging techniques. Validity is higher in scoliosis patients compared with healthy controls. Limitations are a lack of reported statistics of the included studies and small sample sizes.
Conclusion: The first meta-analysis on reliability and validity of rasterstereography shows satisfactory results. Rasterstereography thus presents a reliable and valid alternative to classic radiological imaging technique to assess and evaluate spinal posture in patients with spinal pathologies. Further studies are needed, focusing on the measurement properties of both static and dynamic rasterstereographic measurements.
Keywords: Meta-analysis; Rasterstereography; Reliability; Spinal posture; Validity.