Tibialis anterior analysis from functional and architectural perspective during isometric foot dorsiflexion: a cross-sectional study of repeated measures

Table 1 Reliability of torque, SMG variables (thickness and pennation angle) and EMG (EMG_AUC, EMG_MP) variables of the TA during each isometric foot dorsiflexion intensity

Isometric foot dorsiflexion intensity		100 %	75 %	50 %	25 %
Thickness	Cronbach’s α (IC 95 %)	0.994 (0.989–0.998)	0.987 (0.980–0.992)	0.986 (0.978–0.990)	0.981 (0.969–0.987)
Thickness	SEM (Stand. Error. Measu.)	0.687	0.784	0.822	0.867
Penattion Angle	Cronbach’s α (IC 95 %)	0.992 (0.986–0.998)	0.984 (0.976–0.989)	0.982 (0.974–0.987)	0.973 (0.955–0.984)
Penattion Angle	SEM (Stand. Error. Measu.)	0.389	0.404	0.428	0.477
EMG_MP	Cronbach’s α (IC 95 %)	0.917 (0.880–0.932)	0.878 (0.970–0.991)	0.877 (0.859–0.893)	0.851 (0.920–0.968)
EMG_MP	SEM (Stand. Error. Measu.)	5.193	5.479	5.204	5.388
EMG_AUC	Cronbach’s α (IC 95 %)	0.901 (0.872–0.921)	0.881 (0.871–0.908)	0.869 (0.848–0.883)	0.857 (0.829–0.866)
EMG_AUC	SEM (Stand. Error. Measu.)	7.587	7.690	7.555	7.316
Torque	Cronbach’s α (IC 95 %)	0.998 (0.994–0.999)	0.996 (0.980–0.998)	0.991 (0.982–0.997)	0.980 (0.967–0.995)
Torque	SEM (Stand. Error. Measu.)	0.503	0.376	0.353	0.112

EMG electromyography, TH thickness, PA pennation angle, MP maximum peak, AUC area under the curve

ISSN: 1757-1146