Premium
Reliability of Ultrasound Measures of the Transversus Abdominis: Effect of Task and Transducer Position
Author(s) -
Larivière Christian,
Gag Dany,
De Oliveira Eros,
Henry Sharon M.,
Mecheri Hakim,
Dumas JeanPierre
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
pmandr
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.617
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1934-1563
pISSN - 1934-1482
DOI - 10.1016/j.pmrj.2012.11.002
Subject(s) - intra rater reliability , supine position , medicine , reliability (semiconductor) , transversus abdominis , ultrasound , physical medicine and rehabilitation , abdominal muscles , physical therapy , low back pain , orthodontics , surgery , radiology , confidence interval , power (physics) , physics , quantum mechanics , alternative medicine , pathology
Objective To assess the reliability of ultrasound (US) measures of the transversus abdominis (TrA) muscle in a sample of subjects with and without specific chronic low back pain and to test whether reliability is enhanced by using different abdominal muscle activation tasks, with use of a foam cube for US transducer stabilization or by averaging 3 measures on the same image. Design Cross‐sectional repeated‐measures design. Setting Laboratory setting. Patients Fifteen subjects with chronic low back pain and 15 control subjects. Methods Subjects (n = 30) performed 3 tasks in the supine position: (1) contralateral straight leg raise (SLR), (2) bilateral hook‐lying leg raising (HLR), and (3) abdominal drawing‐in maneuver (ADIM) (control subjects only). Two 7‐second videos of the right and left abdominal wall (from rest to contraction) were collected, with and without use of the foam cube. One of the 2 raters repeated the testing 7 to 14 days later to assess intrarater reliability. Main outcome measurements US imaging of abdominal muscles thickness. Results The TrA muscle was recruited preferentially in the ADIM task compared with the automatic tasks (SLR and HLR). The reliability was comparable among the 3 tasks, with intrarater reliability results being better than interrater reliability results. The use of the foam cube or averaging measures on the same image was generally not effective to increase reliability. Conclusions Although they are not as preferential in TrA recruitment as the ADIM, the SLR and HLR tasks showed comparable reliability results. The foam cube used to control transducer orientation and pressure and averaging measures on the same image had limited effect on reliability.