Reliability and concurrent validity of Iphone®level application for measuring lower limb active flexion and extension range of motions in physical education students

Keywords: joint motion, goniometry, smartphone applications, validity


Background and Study Aim. The aim of this study was to analyse reliability and validity of accelerometer-based Iphone® Level application for measuring lower extremity active flexion and extension joint range of motion. Material and Methods. Thirty physically healthy students enrolled in sport sciences (11 males, 19 females, 21.2±1.5 years, Body mass 64.4±10.0 kg, Height 1.68±0.8 m, Fat percentage 21.2±7.8 %, 22.5±2.6 kg/m2) participated in the measurements of hip, knee, and ankle joint range of motion twice through Universal goniometer and Iphone® Level applications. The same experienced measurer carried out blind study of plantarflexion, dorsiflexion and knee flexion/extension, hip flexion/extension joint range of motion three times for each measurement methods and the other researcher recorded the results. For simultaneous validity analysis Pearson coefficient of correlation was used to decide the level of adaptation between the two intraclass correlation coefficient and Cronbach’s alpha values. Bland-Altman graphics were utilized for level of agreement between these two different methods. Results. The results of Pearson coefficient of correlation analysis revealed a positive correlation between the measurement values of joint range of motion performed through Universal goniometer and Level App (r2 = 0.44-0.94, p <0.05). Bland-Altman graphics showed a good agreement among Cronbach Alpha values and intraclass correlation coefficient in the confidence range of %95, and universal goniometers and Level App application. Conclusions. The results of this study revealed that goniometric measurements using Iphone® Level App is a good reliable method for measuring lower extremity active range of motion compared to universal goniometer.


Download data is not yet available.

| Abstract views: 50 | PDF Downloads: 41 |

Author Biographies

Izzet Kırkaya, Yozgat Bozok University; Faculty of Sport Sciences, Department of Coaching Education, Yozgat Bozok University; Yozgat, Turkey.
Celil Kaçoğlu, Eskişehir Technical University; Faculty of Sport Sciences, Department of Coaching Education, Eskişehir Technical University; Eskişehir, Turkey.
Beyza Şenol, Trakya University; Department of Physical Education and Sport, Institute of Health Sciences, Trakya University; Edirne, Turkey.


1. Şimşek A, Devecioğlu S. Spor Endüstrisinde Yeni Teknolojilerin Görünümü. [Appearance of New Technologies in Sports Industry] Uluslararası Beden Eğitimi Spor Rekreasyon ve Dans Dergisi, 2018;1(1):20–36–49. (Turkish).

2. Özen G, Güllü M, Uğraş S. Beden Eğitimi Öğretmenlerinin Beden Eğitimi Ders İçi ve Dışı Etkinliklerinde Teknolojik Araç ve Gereçlerin Kullanımı İle İlgili Görüşleri. [Physical Education and Sport Teachers’ Views on The Use of Technological Tools and Equipment in Physical Education Lesson and Extracurricular Activities] Gaziantep Üniversitesi Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 2016; 1(1):24–37. (Turkish).

3. Ekmekçi A, Ekmekçi R, İrmiş A. Küreselleşme ve Spor Endüstrisi. [Globalization and The Sports Industry] Pamukkale Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 2013;4(1):91–117. (Turkish).

4. Norkin CC, White DJ. Measurement of Joint Motion: A Guide To Goniometry. FA Davis; 2016.

5. Keleş E, Şimşek E, Salmanı M, Şimşek TT, Angın S, Yakut Y. Eklem Hareket Açıklığı Ölçümünde Kullanılan İki Akıllı Telefon Uygulamasının Uygulayıcı İçi ve Uygulayıcılar Arası Güvenirliğinin İncelenmesi [Examining inter and intra-rater reliability of two smartphones applications used in measuring joint range of motion. J Exerc Ther Rehabil. 2016;3(1):21–29. (Turkish).

6. Furness J, Schram B, Cox AJ, Anderson SL, Keogh J. Reliability and concurrent validity of the iPhone® Compass application to measure thoracic rotation range of motion (ROM) in healthy participants. PeerJ. 2018;6:e4431.

7. Keogh JWL, Cox A, Anderson S, Liew B, Olsen A, Schram B, et al. Reliability and validity of clinically accessible smartphone applications to measure joint range of motion: A systematic review. PLoS One. 2019;14(5):e0215806.

8. Pourahmadi MR, Bagheri R, Taghipour M, Takamjani IE, Sarrafzadeh J, Mohseni-Bandpei MA. A new iPhone application for measuring active craniocervical range of motion in patients with non-specific neck pain: A reliability and validity study. Spine J. 2018;18(3):447–57.

9. Cox RW, Martinez RE, Baker RT, Warren L. Validity of A Smartphone Application for Measuring Ankle Plantar Flexion. J Sport Rehabil, 2018;27(3).

10. 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. Man Ther. 2014;19(6):569–74.

11. Romero-Franco N, Jiménez-Reyes P, González-Hernández JM, Fernández-Domínguez JC. Assessing the concurrent validity and reliability of an iPhone application for the measurement of range of motion and joint position sense in knee and ankle joints of young adults. Phys Ther Sport. 2020;44:136–42.

12. Charlton PC, Mentiplay BF, Pua Y-H, Clark RA. Reliability and concurrent validity of a Smartphone, bubble inclinometer and motion analysis system for measurement of hip joint range of motion. J Sci Med Sport. 2015;18(3):262–7.

13. Boone DC, Azen SP, Lin CM, Spence C, Baron C, Lee L. Reliability of goniometric measurements. Physical therapy, 1978;58(11):1355-1360.

14. Pourahmadi MR, Taghipour M, Jannati E, Mohseni-Bandpei MA, Takamjani IE, Rajabzadeh F. Reliability and validity of an iPhone® application for the measurement of lumbar spine flexion and extension range of motion. PeerJ. 2016;4:2355. 10.7717/peerj.2355

15. Alawna MA, Unver BH, Yuksel EO. The reliability of a smartphone goniometer application compared with a traditional goniometer for measuring ankle joint range of motion. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2019;109(1):22–9.

16. Wang KY, Hussaini SH, Teasdall RD, Gwam CU, Scott AT. Smartphone applications for assessing ankle range of motion in clinical practice. Foot Ankle Orthop. 2019;4(3):247301141987477.

17. Peeler J, Anderson JE. Reliability of the Ely’s test for assessing rectus femoris muscle flexibility and joint range of motion. J Orthop Res. 2008;26(6):793–9. 10.1002/jor.20556

18. Reese NB, Bandy WD. Joint range of motion and muscle length testing-E-book. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2016.

19. Tzalach A, Lifshitz L, Yaniv M, Kurz I, Kalichman L. The correlation between knee flexion lower range of motion and Osgood-schlatter’s syndrome among adolescent soccer players. Br J Med Med Res. 2016;11(2):1–10.

20. Hambly K, Sibley R, Ockendon M. Level of agreement between a novel smartphone application and a long arm goniometer for the assessment of maximum active knee flexion by an inexperienced tester. Int J Physiother Rehabil, 2012; 2:1.

21. Clarkson HM. Musculoskeletal Assessment: Joint Motion and Muscle Testing (Musculoskeletal Assessment). 3nd ed. Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2013.

22. Peeler J, Anderson JE. Reliability of the Ely’s test for assessing rectus femoris muscle flexibility and joint range of motion. J Orthop Res, 2008;26:793–9.

23. Roach S, San Juan JG, Suprak DN, Lyda M. Concurrent validity of digital inclinometer and universal goniometer in assessing passive hip mobility in healthy subjects. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2013;8(5):680–8.

24. DeVellis RF. Scale development: Theory and applications. 2nd edition. Contemp Sociol.; 2003.

25. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 2nd edition. New York: Guildford Publication; 2005.

26. Zou GY. Confidence interval estimation for the Bland-Altman limits of agreement with multiple observations per individual. Stat Methods Med Res. 2013;22(6):630–42.

27. Milani P, Coccetta CA, Rabini A, Sciarra T, Massazza G, Ferriero G. Mobile Smartphone Applications for Body Position Measurement in Rehabilitation: A Review of Goniometric Tools. PM&R, 2014;6:1038–43.

28. Mourcou Q, Fleury A, Franco C, Klopcic F, Vuillerme N. Performance evaluation of smartphone inertial sensors measurement for range of motion. Sensors (Basel). 2015;15(9):23168–87.

29. Wellmon RH, Gulick DT, Paterson ML, Gulick CN. Validity and reliability of 2 goniometric mobile apps: Device, application, and examiner factors. J Sport Rehabil. 2016;25(4):371–9.

30. Dos Santos RA, Derhon V, Brandalize M, Brandalize D, Rossi LP. Evaluation of knee range of motion: Correlation between measurements using a universal goniometer and a smartphone goniometric application. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2017;21(3):699–703.

31. Mohammad WS, Elattar FF, Elsais WM, AlDajah SO. Validity and Reliability of a Smartphone and Digital Inclinometer in Measuring the Lower Extremity Joints Range of Motion. Montenegrin Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 2021:10(2):10.

32. Otter SJ, Agalliu B, Baer N, Hales G, Harvey K, James K, et al. The reliability of a smartphone goniometer application compared with a traditional goniometer for measuring first metatarsophalangeal joint dorsiflexion. J Foot Ankle Res. 2015;8(1):30.

33. Vohralik SL, Bowen AR, Burns J, Hiller CE, Nightingale EJ. Reliability and validity of a smartphone app to measure joint range. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;94(4):325–30.

34. Meislin MA, Wagner ER, Shin AY. A comparison of elbow range of motion measurements: Smartphone-based digital photography versus goniometric measurements. J Hand Surg Am. 2016;41(4):510-515.
How to Cite
Kırkaya I, Kaçoğlu C, Şenol B. Reliability and concurrent validity of Iphone®level application for measuring lower limb active flexion and extension range of motions in physical education students. Physical education of students. 2021;25(3):164-71.