Comparative analysis of quantitative whole body orthostatic postural measures: a systematic review

Background: Measuring whole body posture has played a part in the diagnosis of musculoskeletal conditions for decades. However, there is little evidence supporting the supposed impact of faulty posture on the musculoskeletal system. A valid and reliable method of whole body postural measurement is required to build upon the evidence. The aim of this study was to identify and qualitatively assess quantitative methods of whole body orthostatic postural measurement that are valid, reliable, and that reflect conventional practices. Also investigated was the management of variables that affect posture. Methods: A systematic search through eight electronic databases and a search through grey literature were conducted. Two independent reviewers critically analysed methodologies with a critical analysis tool. Results: Ten articles retrieved from the literature search and three systems from the grey literature found that photogrammetry and ordinal scaling were two methods of measurement. Four studies were of high methodological quality but did not reflect conventional practice. A narrow aspect of reliability was assessed while validity was undetermined. The protocols poorly managed postural variables. Conclusions: Photogrammetry has good potential for precise measurements of whole body orthostatic posture. Further research in establishing protocols to improve the reliability and validity of postural measurement is necessary.