4.7 Article

Protocol and reference values for minimal detectable change of MyotonPRO and ultrasound imaging measurements of muscle and subcutaneous tissue

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-17507-2

关键词

-

资金

  1. UK Space Agency & Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/R005680/1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to assess the reliability of two non-invasive tools for evaluating muscle health, with results showing good to excellent reliability in most aspects. Additionally, established MDC values were provided for several measurement points, supporting the work of both researchers and clinicians.
The assessment of muscle health is of paramount importance, as the loss of muscle mass and strength can affect performance. Two non-invasive tools that have been found to be useful in this are the MyotonPRO and rehabilitative ultrasound imaging, both have shown to be reliable in previous studies many of which conducted by the research team. This study aims to determine the reliability of previously unassessed local body structures and to determine their minimal detectable changes (MDC) to support both researchers and clinicians. Twenty healthy participants were recruited to determine the reliability of seven skin positions out of a previously established protocol. Reliability was determined between three independent raters, and day to day reliability was assessed with one rater a week apart. Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC) between raters and between days for tissue stiffness, tone and elasticity range from moderate to excellent (ICC 0.52-0.97), with most good or excellent. ICCs for subcutaneous thickness between days was good or excellent (ICC 0.86-0.91) and moderate to excellent between raters (ICC 0.72-0.96), in muscles it was moderate to excellent between raters and days (ICC 0.71-0.95). The protocol in this study is repeatable with overall good reliability, it also provides established MDC values for several measurement points.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据