The reliability and validity of the Saliba Postural Classification System

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the reliability and validity of the Saliba Postural Classification System (SPCS). Methods: Two physical therapists classified pictures of 100 volunteer participants standing in their habitual posture for inter and intra-tester reliability. For validity, 54 participants stood on a force plate in a habitual and a corrected posture, while a vertical force was applied through the shoulders until the clinician felt a postural give. Data were extracted at the time the give was felt and at a time in the corrected posture that matched the peak vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) in the habitual posture. Results: Inter-tester reliability demonstrated 75% agreement with a Kappa = 0.64 (95% CI = 0.524–0.756, SE = 0.059). Intra-tester reliability demonstrated 87% agreement with a Kappa = 0.8, (95% CI = 0.702–0.898, SE = 0.05) and 80% agreement with a Kappa = 0.706, (95% CI = 0.594–0818, SE = 0.057). The examiner applied a significantly higher (p < 0.001) peak vertical force in the corrected posture prior to a postural give when compared to the habitual posture. Within the corrected posture, the %VGRF was higher when the test was ongoing vs. when a postural give was felt (p < 0.001). The %VGRF was not different between the two postures when comparing the peaks (p = 0.214). Discussion: The SPCS has substantial agreement for inter- and intra-tester reliability and is largely a valid postural classification system as determined by the larger vertical forces in the corrected postures. Further studies on the correlation between the SPCS and diagnostic classifications are indicated.

Keywords:

• Posture
• Postural alignment
• Postural classification
• Postural stability

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare they have no conflict of interest but believe the above information should be disclosed.

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank April Oury for her assistance in data collection.