LEG LENGTH DISCREPANCY;

Objective: Leg length discrepancy (LLD) has been deemed one of the causative factors for back, sacroiliac conditions andhip pathologies in patients. Increased LLD can exacerbate musculoskeletal impairments in patients that would require the clinician toreflect on the appropriate treatment strategies. The objective of the study was to measure the reliability of “Tape Measure Method” in Leglength discrepancy. Methodology: This is a hospital based study. The procedures for obtaining leg length measures in the study weresimilar to those described by Magee DJ (Orthopedic physical assessment. 5thed).The primary investigator briefly reviewed theprocedures for measuring the leg length with the subjects. Only the subject’s right side was measured for the study. The subject’s weightand height were measured using a standard scale and recorded. The first rater palpated the prominent aspect of the ASIS. The rater thenguided the string to the prominent aspect of the MM. The rater repeated this procedure three times for each subject. After the first raterobtained three strings that correspond to the leg length, the second rater repeated the three measurements using the same procedure.After all cuts of strings were obtained each rater measured the lengths of his three strings with a standard tape measure and was recordedon a separate data sheet. Each rater was blinded to the other measures. Results: Means and standard deviation for each subject’s age,height, weight and BMI were measured. Mean standard deviation and 95% Confidence interval (95% CI) for leg length measurements forboth raters are provided in Table 2. According to the results derived from data there were no significant differences in leg length measuresbetween Rater 1 and Rater 2 (t-value = - 0.000; df = 58; p-value = .9981). The ICC (3, 3) for Rater 1 was .999, (95% CI = .998 to .999).This value indicates almost perfect agreement between the measures for Rater 1. The ICC (3, 3) for Rater 2 was .979 (95% CI = .962 to.990). These findings are indicative of almost perfect agreement between the measures. The ICC (2, 2) between Rater 1 and Rater 2 was.987 (95% CI = .972 to .994). A Bland-Altman plot identifies any bias between the two raters. The bias line is almost on zero, indicating nobias between the two raters. It can be concluded that any observed bias was not clinically important. Conclusions and Discussion: It wasconcluded measuring leg length using the tape measure was simple and highly reliable. There were several limitations that may haveinfluence overall results of the study.