Validity and reliability of the Egyptian algometer in patients with bruxism

Q3 Health Professions

Physiotherapy Quarterly Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.5114/pq.2020.102162

Mostafa M. Ibrahim, M. El-Gendy, E. Helmy, Hamada A. Hamada, Neama H. Neamat Allah

{"title":"Validity and reliability of the Egyptian algometer in patients with bruxism","authors":"Mostafa M. Ibrahim, M. El-Gendy, E. Helmy, Hamada A. Hamada, Neama H. Neamat Allah","doi":"10.5114/pq.2020.102162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. Pressure pain threshold has been quantified by using a gold standard algometer in patients with bruxism. How-ever, the expense associated with quantifying pressure pain threshold to detect trigger points with a gold standard algometer precludes its use in the clinic. This study aimed to measure the reliability and validity of the more accessible Egyptian algometer for pressure pain threshold evaluation in patients with bruxism. Methods. A descriptive repeated-measures study was performed among 100 participants with bruxism. Pressure pain threshold values were collected from the left temporalis, right temporalis, left masseter, and right masseter muscles with the participants sitting. Pressure pain thresholds were assessed over 2 sessions separated by a 1-week interval. Results. intraclass correlation coefficient (iCC) determined the intra-rater reliability and Pearson correlation analysis deter- mined the validity of the Egyptian algometer. iCC equalled 0.878, 0.785, 0.896, and 0.903 for the right masseter, left masseter, right temporalis, and left temporalis muscles, respectively. The standard error of measurement ranged from 0.24 to 0.5, the minimal detectable difference ranged from 0.66 to 1.41, iCC ranged from 0.785 to 0.903. Pearson correlation values were 0.673, 0.670, 0.408, and 0.705 for the right masseter, left masseter, right temporalis, and left temporalis muscles, respectively. Conclusions. High iCCs indicated a strong agreement between the measurement systems, suggesting that the Egyptian algometer is a reliable and valid device for quantification of pressure pain threshold in patients with","PeriodicalId":37315,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/pq.2020.102162","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction. Pressure pain threshold has been quantified by using a gold standard algometer in patients with bruxism. How-ever, the expense associated with quantifying pressure pain threshold to detect trigger points with a gold standard algometer precludes its use in the clinic. This study aimed to measure the reliability and validity of the more accessible Egyptian algometer for pressure pain threshold evaluation in patients with bruxism. Methods. A descriptive repeated-measures study was performed among 100 participants with bruxism. Pressure pain threshold values were collected from the left temporalis, right temporalis, left masseter, and right masseter muscles with the participants sitting. Pressure pain thresholds were assessed over 2 sessions separated by a 1-week interval. Results. intraclass correlation coefficient (iCC) determined the intra-rater reliability and Pearson correlation analysis deter- mined the validity of the Egyptian algometer. iCC equalled 0.878, 0.785, 0.896, and 0.903 for the right masseter, left masseter, right temporalis, and left temporalis muscles, respectively. The standard error of measurement ranged from 0.24 to 0.5, the minimal detectable difference ranged from 0.66 to 1.41, iCC ranged from 0.785 to 0.903. Pearson correlation values were 0.673, 0.670, 0.408, and 0.705 for the right masseter, left masseter, right temporalis, and left temporalis muscles, respectively. Conclusions. High iCCs indicated a strong agreement between the measurement systems, suggesting that the Egyptian algometer is a reliable and valid device for quantification of pressure pain threshold in patients with

查看原文本刊更多论文

埃及算法在磨牙患者中的效度和信度

介绍。压痛阈已量化使用金标准algometer磨牙患者。然而，与量化压力疼痛阈值相关的费用，以检测触发点与金标准算法妨碍了其在临床应用。本研究旨在测量更容易获得的埃及算法对磨牙患者压力痛阈值评估的信度和效度。方法。对100名磨牙患者进行了描述性重复测量研究。在受试者坐着时，采集左颞肌、右颞肌、左咬肌和右咬肌的压痛阈值。压力疼痛阈值在2个疗程中评估，间隔1周。结果。类内相关系数(iCC)决定了类内信度，Pearson相关分析决定了埃及算法的效度。右咬肌、左咬肌、右颞肌、左颞肌的iCC值分别为0.878、0.785、0.896、0.903。测量标准误差范围为0.24 ~ 0.5，最小可检出差异范围为0.66 ~ 1.41,iCC范围为0.785 ~ 0.903。右侧咬肌、左侧咬肌、右侧颞肌和左侧颞肌的Pearson相关值分别为0.673、0.670、0.408和0.705。结论。高icc表明测量系统之间有很强的一致性，表明埃及测量仪是一种可靠和有效的设备，用于量化患者的压力痛阈值

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Physiotherapy Quarterly Health Professions-Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

CiteScore

0.80

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： Physiotherapy Quarterly ISSN 2544-4395 (formerly Fizjoterapia ISSN 1230-8323) is an international scientific peer-reviewed journal, published in both paper and electronic format by the University School of Physical Education in Wroclaw, Poland. The original version of the journal is its paper issue. The Editorial Office accepts original papers on various aspects of physiotherapy and rehabilitation for publication. Manuscripts in basic science and clinical physiotherapy science are published at the highest priority. Letters to the Editor, reports from scientific meetings and book reviews are also considered. Physiotherapy Quarterly publishes papers that show depth, rigor, originality and high-quality presentation. The scope of the journal: evidence-based rehabilitation; the mechanisms of function or dysfunction; modern therapy methods; best clinical practice; clinical reasoning and decision-making processes; assessment and clinical management of disorders; exploration of relevant clinical interventions; multi-modal approaches; psychosocial issues; expectations, experiences, and perspectives of physiotherapists. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods research articles are welcomed, together with systematic and high-quality narrative reviews.