Smartphone and Universal Goniometer for Measurement of Elbow Joint Motions: A Comparative Study


Behnam Behnoush 1 , Nasim Tavakoli 2 , Elham Bazmi 3 , Fariborz Nateghi Fard 3 , Mohammad Hossein Pourgharib Shahi 4 , Arash Okazi 1 , * , Tahmineh Mokhtari 1

1 Department of Forensic Medicine, Medical School, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IR Iran

2 Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, IR Iran

3 Legal Medicine Research Center, Tehran, IR Iran

4 Sports Medicine Research Center, Neuroscience Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IR Iran

How to Cite: Behnoush B, Tavakoli N, Bazmi E, Nateghi Fard F, Pourgharib Shahi M H, et al. Smartphone and Universal Goniometer for Measurement of Elbow Joint Motions: A Comparative Study, Asian J Sports Med. 2016 ; 7(2):e30668. doi: 10.5812/asjsm.30668.


Asian Journal of Sports Medicine: 7 (2); e30668
Published Online: June 10, 2016
Article Type: Research Article
Received: June 15, 2015
Accepted: November 21, 2015


Background: Universal goniometer (UG) is commonly used as a standard method to evaluate range of motion (ROM) as part of joint motions. It has some restrictions, such as involvement of both hands of the physician, leads to instability of hands and error. Nowadays smartphones usage has been increasing due to its easy application.

Objectives: The study was designed to compare the smartphone inclinometer-based app and UG in evaluation of ROM of elbow.

Materials and Methods: The maximum ROM of elbow in position of flexion and pronation and supination of forearm were examined in 60 healthy volunteers with UG and smartphone. Data were analyzed using SPSS (ver. 16) software and appropriate statistical tests were applied, such as paired t-test, ICC and Bland Altman curves.

Results: The results of this study showed high reliability and validity of smartphone in regarding UG with ICC > 0.95. The highest reliability for both methods was in elbow supination and the lowest was in the elbow flexion (0.84).

Conclusions: Smartphones due to ease of access and usage for the physician and the patient, may be good alternatives for UG.

Full Text

Full text is available in PDF

© 2016, Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ( which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.