The Reliability and Validity of a Clinical Measurement Proposed to Quantify Humeral Torsion

# Background Range of motion (ROM) impairments of the overhead athletes' shoulder are commonly addressed through mobility-based treatments, however, adaptations from humeral torsion (HT) are not amenable to such interventions. A clinical measurement to quantify HT has been proposed, however, t...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Paul A. Salamh, William J. Hanney, Lauren Champion, Connor Hansen, Kari Cochenour, Celine Siahmakoun, Morey J. Kolber
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	North American Sports Medicine Institute 2022
Materias:	Sports medicine RC1200-1245
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/ab5f8da03a974da184a375f03fa92461
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:ab5f8da03a974da184a375f03fa92461
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:ab5f8da03a974da184a375f03fa924612021-12-02T00:38:44ZThe Reliability and Validity of a Clinical Measurement Proposed to Quantify Humeral Torsion2159-2896https://doaj.org/article/ab5f8da03a974da184a375f03fa924612022-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://ijspt.scholasticahq.com/article/29593-the-reliability-and-validity-of-a-clinical-measurement-proposed-to-quantify-humeral-torsion.pdfhttps://doaj.org/toc/2159-2896# Background Range of motion (ROM) impairments of the overhead athletes' shoulder are commonly addressed through mobility-based treatments, however, adaptations from humeral torsion (HT) are not amenable to such interventions. A clinical measurement to quantify HT has been proposed, however, the validity is not conclusive. # Purpose The primary aim of this study is to determine the intrarater reliability and standard error of measurement (SEM) of the biceps forearm angle (BFA) measurement. The secondary aim of this study is to investigate the convergent validity of the BFA compared to diagnostic ultrasound. # Study Design Cross Sectional Reliability and Validity Study # Methods HT measurements, utilizing diagnostic ultrasound, were compared to BFA in 74 shoulders (37 subjects) over two sessions. Each measurement was performed three times and a third investigator recorded measures to ensure blinding. Reliability was investigated using utilizing an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 3,k) # Results Intrarater reliability values were 0.923 and 0.849 for diagnostic ultrasound and BFA methods respectively. Convergent validity was r = 0.566. The standard error of measurement for diagnostic ultrasound and BFA was 3° and 5°, respectively. The 95% limits of agreement between the two measurement methods were -24.80° and 19.80° with a mean difference of -2.50° indicating that on average the diagnostic ultrasound measurement was lower than that of the BFA method. # Conclusion The BFA is a reliable clinical method for quantifying HT, however, demonstrates moderate to poor convergent validity when compared to diagnostic ultrasound. # Level of Evidence 2bPaul A. SalamhWilliam J. HanneyLauren ChampionConnor HansenKari CochenourCeline SiahmakounMorey J. KolberNorth American Sports Medicine InstitutearticleSports medicineRC1200-1245ENInternational Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, Vol 16, Iss 6 (2022)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Sports medicine RC1200-1245
spellingShingle	Sports medicine RC1200-1245 Paul A. Salamh William J. Hanney Lauren Champion Connor Hansen Kari Cochenour Celine Siahmakoun Morey J. Kolber The Reliability and Validity of a Clinical Measurement Proposed to Quantify Humeral Torsion
description	# Background Range of motion (ROM) impairments of the overhead athletes' shoulder are commonly addressed through mobility-based treatments, however, adaptations from humeral torsion (HT) are not amenable to such interventions. A clinical measurement to quantify HT has been proposed, however, the validity is not conclusive. # Purpose The primary aim of this study is to determine the intrarater reliability and standard error of measurement (SEM) of the biceps forearm angle (BFA) measurement. The secondary aim of this study is to investigate the convergent validity of the BFA compared to diagnostic ultrasound. # Study Design Cross Sectional Reliability and Validity Study # Methods HT measurements, utilizing diagnostic ultrasound, were compared to BFA in 74 shoulders (37 subjects) over two sessions. Each measurement was performed three times and a third investigator recorded measures to ensure blinding. Reliability was investigated using utilizing an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 3,k) # Results Intrarater reliability values were 0.923 and 0.849 for diagnostic ultrasound and BFA methods respectively. Convergent validity was r = 0.566. The standard error of measurement for diagnostic ultrasound and BFA was 3° and 5°, respectively. The 95% limits of agreement between the two measurement methods were -24.80° and 19.80° with a mean difference of -2.50° indicating that on average the diagnostic ultrasound measurement was lower than that of the BFA method. # Conclusion The BFA is a reliable clinical method for quantifying HT, however, demonstrates moderate to poor convergent validity when compared to diagnostic ultrasound. # Level of Evidence 2b
format	article
author	Paul A. Salamh William J. Hanney Lauren Champion Connor Hansen Kari Cochenour Celine Siahmakoun Morey J. Kolber
author_facet	Paul A. Salamh William J. Hanney Lauren Champion Connor Hansen Kari Cochenour Celine Siahmakoun Morey J. Kolber
author_sort	Paul A. Salamh
title	The Reliability and Validity of a Clinical Measurement Proposed to Quantify Humeral Torsion
title_short	The Reliability and Validity of a Clinical Measurement Proposed to Quantify Humeral Torsion
title_full	The Reliability and Validity of a Clinical Measurement Proposed to Quantify Humeral Torsion
title_fullStr	The Reliability and Validity of a Clinical Measurement Proposed to Quantify Humeral Torsion
title_full_unstemmed	The Reliability and Validity of a Clinical Measurement Proposed to Quantify Humeral Torsion
title_sort	reliability and validity of a clinical measurement proposed to quantify humeral torsion
publisher	North American Sports Medicine Institute
publishDate	2022
url	https://doaj.org/article/ab5f8da03a974da184a375f03fa92461
work_keys_str_mv	AT paulasalamh thereliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion AT williamjhanney thereliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion AT laurenchampion thereliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion AT connorhansen thereliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion AT karicochenour thereliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion AT celinesiahmakoun thereliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion AT moreyjkolber thereliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion AT paulasalamh reliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion AT williamjhanney reliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion AT laurenchampion reliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion AT connorhansen reliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion AT karicochenour reliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion AT celinesiahmakoun reliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion AT moreyjkolber reliabilityandvalidityofaclinicalmeasurementproposedtoquantifyhumeraltorsion
_version_	1718403574942138368

The Reliability and Validity of a Clinical Measurement Proposed to Quantify Humeral Torsion

Ejemplares similares