超声成像和肌电图测量核心稳定性测试的并发效度和重测信度

S. Yoo, N. Lee, Chanhee Park, J. H. You
{"title":"超声成像和肌电图测量核心稳定性测试的并发效度和重测信度","authors":"S. Yoo, N. Lee, Chanhee Park, J. H. You","doi":"10.12674/ptk.2021.28.3.186","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: While the formal test has been used to provide a quantitative measurement of core stability, studies have reported inconsistent results regarding its test-retest and intraobserver reliabilities. Furthermore, the validity of the formal test has never been established. Objects: This study aimed to establish the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of the formal test. Methods: Twenty-two young adults with and without core instability (23.1 ± 2.0 years) were recruited. Concurrent validity was determined by comparing the muscle thickness changes of the external oblique, internal oblique, and transverse abdominal muscle to changes in core stability pressure during the formal test using ultrasound (US) imaging and pressure biofeedback, respectively. For the test-retest reliability, muscle thickness and pressure changes were repeatedly measured approximately 24 hours apart. Electromyography (EMG) was used to monitor trunk muscle activity during the formal test. Results: The Pearson’s correlation analysis showed an excellent correlation between transverse abdominal thickness and pressure biofeedback unit (PBU) pressure as well as internal oblique thickness and PBU pressure, ranging from r = 0.856–0.980, p < 0.05. The test-retest reliability was good, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC1,2) = 0.876 for the core stability pressure measure and ICC1,2 = 0.939 to 0.989 for the abdominal muscle thickness measure. Conclusion: Our results provide clinical evidence that the formal test is valid and reliable, when concurrently incorporated into EMG and US measurements.","PeriodicalId":170352,"journal":{"name":"Physical Therapy Korea","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Concurrent Validity and Test-retest Reliability of the Core Stability Test Using Ultrasound Imaging and Electromyography Measurements\",\"authors\":\"S. Yoo, N. Lee, Chanhee Park, J. H. You\",\"doi\":\"10.12674/ptk.2021.28.3.186\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: While the formal test has been used to provide a quantitative measurement of core stability, studies have reported inconsistent results regarding its test-retest and intraobserver reliabilities. Furthermore, the validity of the formal test has never been established. Objects: This study aimed to establish the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of the formal test. Methods: Twenty-two young adults with and without core instability (23.1 ± 2.0 years) were recruited. Concurrent validity was determined by comparing the muscle thickness changes of the external oblique, internal oblique, and transverse abdominal muscle to changes in core stability pressure during the formal test using ultrasound (US) imaging and pressure biofeedback, respectively. For the test-retest reliability, muscle thickness and pressure changes were repeatedly measured approximately 24 hours apart. Electromyography (EMG) was used to monitor trunk muscle activity during the formal test. Results: The Pearson’s correlation analysis showed an excellent correlation between transverse abdominal thickness and pressure biofeedback unit (PBU) pressure as well as internal oblique thickness and PBU pressure, ranging from r = 0.856–0.980, p < 0.05. The test-retest reliability was good, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC1,2) = 0.876 for the core stability pressure measure and ICC1,2 = 0.939 to 0.989 for the abdominal muscle thickness measure. Conclusion: Our results provide clinical evidence that the formal test is valid and reliable, when concurrently incorporated into EMG and US measurements.\",\"PeriodicalId\":170352,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physical Therapy Korea\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physical Therapy Korea\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12674/ptk.2021.28.3.186\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical Therapy Korea","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12674/ptk.2021.28.3.186","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:虽然正式测试已被用于提供核心稳定性的定量测量,但研究报告了关于其重测和观察者内部信度的不一致结果。此外,正式测试的有效性从未得到确定。目的:建立形式测验的并发效度和重测信度。方法:招募22名有或无核心不稳的年轻人(23.1±2.0岁)。通过比较腹外斜肌、腹内斜肌和横肌在正式测试期间的肌肉厚度变化与核心稳定性压力的变化,分别采用超声(US)成像和压力生物反馈来确定并发有效性。为了测试重测的可靠性,肌肉厚度和压力的变化间隔大约24小时重复测量。肌电图(Electromyography, EMG)在正式测试期间监测躯干肌肉活动。结果:Pearson相关分析显示,腹部横向厚度与压力生物反馈单元(PBU)压力、腹部斜向厚度与PBU压力具有良好的相关性,r = 0.856 ~ 0.980, p < 0.05。重测信度良好,组内相关系数(ICC1,2) = 0.876,组内相关系数(ICC1,2) = 0.939 ~ 0.989。结论:我们的结果提供了临床证据,当同时纳入肌电图和超声测量时,正式测试是有效和可靠的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Concurrent Validity and Test-retest Reliability of the Core Stability Test Using Ultrasound Imaging and Electromyography Measurements
Background: While the formal test has been used to provide a quantitative measurement of core stability, studies have reported inconsistent results regarding its test-retest and intraobserver reliabilities. Furthermore, the validity of the formal test has never been established. Objects: This study aimed to establish the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of the formal test. Methods: Twenty-two young adults with and without core instability (23.1 ± 2.0 years) were recruited. Concurrent validity was determined by comparing the muscle thickness changes of the external oblique, internal oblique, and transverse abdominal muscle to changes in core stability pressure during the formal test using ultrasound (US) imaging and pressure biofeedback, respectively. For the test-retest reliability, muscle thickness and pressure changes were repeatedly measured approximately 24 hours apart. Electromyography (EMG) was used to monitor trunk muscle activity during the formal test. Results: The Pearson’s correlation analysis showed an excellent correlation between transverse abdominal thickness and pressure biofeedback unit (PBU) pressure as well as internal oblique thickness and PBU pressure, ranging from r = 0.856–0.980, p < 0.05. The test-retest reliability was good, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC1,2) = 0.876 for the core stability pressure measure and ICC1,2 = 0.939 to 0.989 for the abdominal muscle thickness measure. Conclusion: Our results provide clinical evidence that the formal test is valid and reliable, when concurrently incorporated into EMG and US measurements.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信