Do fast movements assess proprioception in the Joint Position Sense (JPS) test for the neck?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: November 10, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Joint Position Sense Testing for Neck Proprioception: Movement Speed and Predictability

No, fast and predictable movements do not properly assess proprioception in the Joint Position Sense (JPS) test for the neck—slow, controlled movements with unpredictable target positions are essential for valid proprioceptive assessment.

Key Testing Parameters for Valid JPS Assessment

Movement Speed Requirements

The JPS test requires slow, controlled cervical movements to accurately assess proprioceptive function 1, 2. Fast movements introduce momentum and vestibular confounding factors that obscure true proprioceptive deficits. The test specifically measures a person's ability to accurately return their head to a predefined target after cervical movement, which requires conscious proprioceptive awareness rather than ballistic motor control 1.

Predictability Considerations

Unpredictable target positions enhance test validity by preventing motor learning and compensation strategies 3, 2. When movements become predictable, subjects can rely on motor patterns rather than true proprioceptive feedback, reducing the test's discriminative ability.

Critical Methodological Requirements

Number of Repetitions

At least 6 repetitions are mandatory for reliable JPS testing 1, 2. This is a crucial finding:

  • All studies calculating JPSE over at least 6 trials showed significantly increased error in neck pain groups 1
  • Studies with fewer repetitions failed to demonstrate significant differences between groups 1
  • Test-retest reliability requires 6 or more repetitions to achieve good reliability (ICC values) 2

Measurement Approach

The test should assess absolute joint position error (JPE) rather than constant JPE 3, 4:

  • Absolute JPE showed large effect sizes (Cohen's d: 0.79-2.00) in detecting proprioceptive changes 3
  • Constant JPE failed to show large effect sizes in responsiveness testing 3
  • Absolute JPE demonstrated sufficient reliability and validity with low/very low evidence levels 4

Clinical Interpretation Thresholds

Joint position error >4.5° indicates proprioceptive impairment 2. Studies demonstrating discriminative validity consistently reported:

  • Mean JPE >4.5° in neck pain populations
  • Mean JPE <4.5° in asymptomatic controls 2

This threshold provides a clinically meaningful cutoff for identifying proprioceptive deficits.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

Test Selection Issues

Different proprioceptive tests measure distinct functional attributes and cannot be used interchangeably 5, 2:

  • Kinaesthesia tests (movement detection) do not correlate with JPS tests (position sense) 5
  • Different JPS protocols show low correlations with each other 2
  • A subject's performance on one proprioceptive test does not predict performance on another 5

Equipment and Positioning

The head-to-neutral test using a head-mounted laser pointer is the most validated approach 2:

  • Reliable and valid when 6+ repetitions performed 2
  • Successfully discriminates between those with and without neck pain 2
  • Testing should occur in both sitting and standing positions for comprehensive assessment 3

Movement Direction Considerations

All cardinal planes require separate assessment (flexion, extension, right rotation, left rotation) 3, 1:

  • Each movement direction may show different error patterns 3
  • Traumatic neck pain populations consistently show higher JPSE across all directions 1
  • Non-traumatic neck pain shows more variable patterns requiring multi-directional testing 1

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.