Skip to main content

Table 10 Reliability of ultrasonography

From: Importance and challenges of measuring intrinsic foot muscle strength

Method

Test

Paper

Participant

Parameter

Reliability

Comment

     

Statistic

Intrarater

Interrater

 
      

Within session

Between session

Hallux toe

Lesser toes

 

Indirect

US (Chison 8300 Deluxe Digital System-Portable Model)

Hing et al. (2009) [61]

Healthy Asymptomatic participants

Dorsoplantar thickness of AbdH

ICC

0.979(95% CI 0.99-0.99)

0.96 (95%CI 0.93-0.97)

   

Age 28.24 ±10.2 year

Sex M & F n=30

Medio-lat width of AbdH

ICC

0.95 (95%CI 0.92-0.97)

0.88 (95%CI 0.80-0.93)

   

CSA

ICC

0.99 (95%CI 0.98-0.99)

0.78 (95%CI 0.64-0.87)

   
 

US (Philips HDII-High end model)

Cameron et al. (2008) [70]

Healthy Asymptomatic participants

Dorso-plantar thickness of AbdH

ICC

0.97(95% CI 0.98-0.99)

0.97(95%CI 0.93-0.98)

   

Age 28.24 ± 10.2 year

Sex M & F n=30

       
    

Medio-lat width of AbdH

ICC

0.97(95% CI 0.92-0.97)

0.94 (95%CI 0.90-0.96)

   
    

CSA

ICC

0.98 (95%CI 0.98-0.979)

0.79 (95%CI 0.65-0.88)

   
  1. Legend: Abbreviations: US-Ultrasonography, M-Male, F-Female, AbdH-Abductor hallucis, CSA-cross sectional area. Reliability was interpreted in terms of benchmarks suggested by Fleiss[51] where an ICC or Kappa value (excellent reliability, >0.75; fair to good reliability, 0.40–0.75; and poor reliability, <0.4.