Cargando…

Validity of ultrasound imaging for intrinsic foot muscle cross-sectional area measurements demonstrated by strong agreement with MRI

PURPOSE: Intrinsic foot muscles maintain foot structural integrity and contribute to functional movement, posture and balance. Thus, assessing intrinsic foot muscle size and strength are important. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to accurately image the individual muscles but is cost...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Swanson, Dallin C, Sponbeck, Joshua K, Swanson, Derek A, Stevens, Conner D, Allen, Steven P., Mitchell, Ulrike H., George, James D., Johnson, Aaron Wayne
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8842549/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35164718
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05090-6
_version_ 1784651070464589824
author Swanson, Dallin C
Sponbeck, Joshua K
Swanson, Derek A
Stevens, Conner D
Allen, Steven P.
Mitchell, Ulrike H.
George, James D.
Johnson, Aaron Wayne
author_facet Swanson, Dallin C
Sponbeck, Joshua K
Swanson, Derek A
Stevens, Conner D
Allen, Steven P.
Mitchell, Ulrike H.
George, James D.
Johnson, Aaron Wayne
author_sort Swanson, Dallin C
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Intrinsic foot muscles maintain foot structural integrity and contribute to functional movement, posture and balance. Thus, assessing intrinsic foot muscle size and strength are important. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to accurately image the individual muscles but is costly and time consuming. Ultrasound (US) imaging may provide an alternative that is less costly and more readily available. The purpose of this study was to investigate the validity and intratester reliability of US imaging in measuring intrinsic foot muscle size in comparison to MRI. METHODS: US and MRI were employed to measure the intrinsic foot muscle size involving 35 participants (females = 13; males = 22). The scanned intrinsic foot muscles included the flexor hallucis brevis (FHB), abductor hallucis (ABDH), flexor digitorum brevis (FDB), quadratus plantae (QP) and abductor digiti minimi (ADM). Pearson product correlation (r), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of the measurement (SEm) and minimal detectable difference (MDD) were calculated. RESULTS: High correlations were detected between the US and MRI cross-sectional area (CSA) measurements (r = .971 to 0.995). Test reliability was excellent for both MRI and US (ICC = 0.994 to 0.999). Limits of agreement between MRI and US measurements from ranged from 5.7 to 12.2% of muscle size. SEm values for US ranged from 0.026 to 0.044 cm2, while the SEm for MRI ranged from 0.018 to 0.023 cm2. MDD values for US ranged from 0.073 to 0.122 cm2, while MRI ranged from 0.045 to 0.064 cm2. CONCLUSIONS: US appears to be a valid and reliable alternative to MRI when measuring intrinsic foot muscle CSA. While US is less costly and more readily available, the MRI results were shown to be slightly more precise.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8842549
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88425492022-02-16 Validity of ultrasound imaging for intrinsic foot muscle cross-sectional area measurements demonstrated by strong agreement with MRI Swanson, Dallin C Sponbeck, Joshua K Swanson, Derek A Stevens, Conner D Allen, Steven P. Mitchell, Ulrike H. George, James D. Johnson, Aaron Wayne BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research PURPOSE: Intrinsic foot muscles maintain foot structural integrity and contribute to functional movement, posture and balance. Thus, assessing intrinsic foot muscle size and strength are important. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to accurately image the individual muscles but is costly and time consuming. Ultrasound (US) imaging may provide an alternative that is less costly and more readily available. The purpose of this study was to investigate the validity and intratester reliability of US imaging in measuring intrinsic foot muscle size in comparison to MRI. METHODS: US and MRI were employed to measure the intrinsic foot muscle size involving 35 participants (females = 13; males = 22). The scanned intrinsic foot muscles included the flexor hallucis brevis (FHB), abductor hallucis (ABDH), flexor digitorum brevis (FDB), quadratus plantae (QP) and abductor digiti minimi (ADM). Pearson product correlation (r), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of the measurement (SEm) and minimal detectable difference (MDD) were calculated. RESULTS: High correlations were detected between the US and MRI cross-sectional area (CSA) measurements (r = .971 to 0.995). Test reliability was excellent for both MRI and US (ICC = 0.994 to 0.999). Limits of agreement between MRI and US measurements from ranged from 5.7 to 12.2% of muscle size. SEm values for US ranged from 0.026 to 0.044 cm2, while the SEm for MRI ranged from 0.018 to 0.023 cm2. MDD values for US ranged from 0.073 to 0.122 cm2, while MRI ranged from 0.045 to 0.064 cm2. CONCLUSIONS: US appears to be a valid and reliable alternative to MRI when measuring intrinsic foot muscle CSA. While US is less costly and more readily available, the MRI results were shown to be slightly more precise. BioMed Central 2022-02-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8842549/ /pubmed/35164718 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05090-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Swanson, Dallin C
Sponbeck, Joshua K
Swanson, Derek A
Stevens, Conner D
Allen, Steven P.
Mitchell, Ulrike H.
George, James D.
Johnson, Aaron Wayne
Validity of ultrasound imaging for intrinsic foot muscle cross-sectional area measurements demonstrated by strong agreement with MRI
title Validity of ultrasound imaging for intrinsic foot muscle cross-sectional area measurements demonstrated by strong agreement with MRI
title_full Validity of ultrasound imaging for intrinsic foot muscle cross-sectional area measurements demonstrated by strong agreement with MRI
title_fullStr Validity of ultrasound imaging for intrinsic foot muscle cross-sectional area measurements demonstrated by strong agreement with MRI
title_full_unstemmed Validity of ultrasound imaging for intrinsic foot muscle cross-sectional area measurements demonstrated by strong agreement with MRI
title_short Validity of ultrasound imaging for intrinsic foot muscle cross-sectional area measurements demonstrated by strong agreement with MRI
title_sort validity of ultrasound imaging for intrinsic foot muscle cross-sectional area measurements demonstrated by strong agreement with mri
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8842549/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35164718
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05090-6
work_keys_str_mv AT swansondallinc validityofultrasoundimagingforintrinsicfootmusclecrosssectionalareameasurementsdemonstratedbystrongagreementwithmri
AT sponbeckjoshuak validityofultrasoundimagingforintrinsicfootmusclecrosssectionalareameasurementsdemonstratedbystrongagreementwithmri
AT swansondereka validityofultrasoundimagingforintrinsicfootmusclecrosssectionalareameasurementsdemonstratedbystrongagreementwithmri
AT stevensconnerd validityofultrasoundimagingforintrinsicfootmusclecrosssectionalareameasurementsdemonstratedbystrongagreementwithmri
AT allenstevenp validityofultrasoundimagingforintrinsicfootmusclecrosssectionalareameasurementsdemonstratedbystrongagreementwithmri
AT mitchellulrikeh validityofultrasoundimagingforintrinsicfootmusclecrosssectionalareameasurementsdemonstratedbystrongagreementwithmri
AT georgejamesd validityofultrasoundimagingforintrinsicfootmusclecrosssectionalareameasurementsdemonstratedbystrongagreementwithmri
AT johnsonaaronwayne validityofultrasoundimagingforintrinsicfootmusclecrosssectionalareameasurementsdemonstratedbystrongagreementwithmri