Concurrent Validity and Reliability of Manual Versus Specific Device Transcostal Measurements for Breathing Diaphragm Thickness by Ultrasonography in Lumbopelvic Pain Athletes.

The use of rehabilitative ultrasound imaging (RUSI) to evaluate diaphragm thickness during breathing in athletes who suffer from non-specific lumbopelvic pain presents some measurement errors. The purpose of this study was to evaluate intra- and inter-sessions, intra- and inter-rater reliabilities,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Marugán Rubio, Daniel, Becerro De Bengoa Vallejo, Ricardo, López Chicharro, José, Losa Iglesias, Marta Elena, Rodríguez Sanz, David, Vicente Campos, Davinia, Dávila Sánchez, Gabriel J, Calvo Lobo, César
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2021
País:España
Institución:Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)
Repositorio:Docta Complutense
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/8596
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/8596
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:low back pain
repeatability
respiration
ultrasonography
validity
Fisioterapia (Enfermería, Fisioterapia y Podología)
3213.11 Fisioterapia
id ES_9fa5eaa947abd7f635f3c8a0f9075288
oai_identifier_str oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/8596
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Concurrent Validity and Reliability of Manual Versus Specific Device Transcostal Measurements for Breathing Diaphragm Thickness by Ultrasonography in Lumbopelvic Pain Athletes.Marugán Rubio, DanielBecerro De Bengoa Vallejo, RicardoLópez Chicharro, JoséLosa Iglesias, Marta ElenaRodríguez Sanz, DavidVicente Campos, DaviniaDávila Sánchez, Gabriel JCalvo Lobo, Césarlow back painrepeatabilityrespirationultrasonographyvalidityFisioterapia (Enfermería, Fisioterapia y Podología)3213.11 FisioterapiaThe use of rehabilitative ultrasound imaging (RUSI) to evaluate diaphragm thickness during breathing in athletes who suffer from non-specific lumbopelvic pain presents some measurement errors. The purpose of this study was to evaluate intra- and inter-sessions, intra- and inter-rater reliabilities, and concurrent validity of diaphragm thickness measurements during breathing using transcostal RUSI with a novel thoracic orthotic device that was used to fix the US probe versus those measurements obtained using manual fixation. A total of 37 athletes with non-specific lumbopelvic pain were recruited. Intra- (same examiner) and inter-rater (two examiners) and intra- (same day) and inter-session (alternate days) reliabilities were analyzed. All measurements were obtained after manual probe fixation and after positioning the thoracic orthotic device to fix the US probe in order to correctly correlate both measurement methods. Both left and right hemi-diaphragm thickness measurements were performed by transcostal RUSI at maximum inspiration, expiration, and the difference between the two parameters during relaxed breathing. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), standard errors of measurement (SEM), minimum detectable changes (MCD), systematic errors, and correlations () were assessed. Orthotic device probe fixation showed excellent reliability (ICC = 0.852-0.996, SEM = 0.0002-0.054, and MDC = 0.002-0.072), and most measurements did not show significant systematic errors ( > 0.05). Despite manual probe fixation with a reliability ranging from good to excellent (ICC = 0.714-0.997, SEM = 0.003-0.023, and MDC = 0.008-0.064 cm), several significant systematic measurement errors ( < 0.05) were found. Most significant correlations between both orthotic device and manual probe fixation methods were moderate ( = 0.486-0.718; < 0.05). Bland-Altman plots indicated adequate agreement between both measurement methods according to the agreement limits. The proposed novel thoracic orthotic device may allow ultrasound probe fixation to provide valid and reliable transcostal RUSI measurements of diaphragmatic thickness during relaxed breathing thus reducing some measurement errors and avoiding systematic measurement errors. It may be advisable to measure diaphragm thickness and facilitate visual biofeedback with respect to diaphragm re-education during normal breathing in athletes with non-specific lumbopelvic pain.MDPIUniversidad Complutense de Madrid20212021-06-2420212021-06-24journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/8596reponame:Docta Complutenseinstname:Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)Inglésengopen accesshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2Atribución 3.0 Españahttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/85962026-06-02T12:44:21Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Concurrent Validity and Reliability of Manual Versus Specific Device Transcostal Measurements for Breathing Diaphragm Thickness by Ultrasonography in Lumbopelvic Pain Athletes.
title Concurrent Validity and Reliability of Manual Versus Specific Device Transcostal Measurements for Breathing Diaphragm Thickness by Ultrasonography in Lumbopelvic Pain Athletes.
spellingShingle Concurrent Validity and Reliability of Manual Versus Specific Device Transcostal Measurements for Breathing Diaphragm Thickness by Ultrasonography in Lumbopelvic Pain Athletes.
Marugán Rubio, Daniel
low back pain
repeatability
respiration
ultrasonography
validity
Fisioterapia (Enfermería, Fisioterapia y Podología)
3213.11 Fisioterapia
title_short Concurrent Validity and Reliability of Manual Versus Specific Device Transcostal Measurements for Breathing Diaphragm Thickness by Ultrasonography in Lumbopelvic Pain Athletes.
title_full Concurrent Validity and Reliability of Manual Versus Specific Device Transcostal Measurements for Breathing Diaphragm Thickness by Ultrasonography in Lumbopelvic Pain Athletes.
title_fullStr Concurrent Validity and Reliability of Manual Versus Specific Device Transcostal Measurements for Breathing Diaphragm Thickness by Ultrasonography in Lumbopelvic Pain Athletes.
title_full_unstemmed Concurrent Validity and Reliability of Manual Versus Specific Device Transcostal Measurements for Breathing Diaphragm Thickness by Ultrasonography in Lumbopelvic Pain Athletes.
title_sort Concurrent Validity and Reliability of Manual Versus Specific Device Transcostal Measurements for Breathing Diaphragm Thickness by Ultrasonography in Lumbopelvic Pain Athletes.
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Marugán Rubio, Daniel
Becerro De Bengoa Vallejo, Ricardo
López Chicharro, José
Losa Iglesias, Marta Elena
Rodríguez Sanz, David
Vicente Campos, Davinia
Dávila Sánchez, Gabriel J
Calvo Lobo, César
author Marugán Rubio, Daniel
author_facet Marugán Rubio, Daniel
Becerro De Bengoa Vallejo, Ricardo
López Chicharro, José
Losa Iglesias, Marta Elena
Rodríguez Sanz, David
Vicente Campos, Davinia
Dávila Sánchez, Gabriel J
Calvo Lobo, César
author_role author
author2 Becerro De Bengoa Vallejo, Ricardo
López Chicharro, José
Losa Iglesias, Marta Elena
Rodríguez Sanz, David
Vicente Campos, Davinia
Dávila Sánchez, Gabriel J
Calvo Lobo, César
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidad Complutense de Madrid
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv low back pain
repeatability
respiration
ultrasonography
validity
Fisioterapia (Enfermería, Fisioterapia y Podología)
3213.11 Fisioterapia
topic low back pain
repeatability
respiration
ultrasonography
validity
Fisioterapia (Enfermería, Fisioterapia y Podología)
3213.11 Fisioterapia
description The use of rehabilitative ultrasound imaging (RUSI) to evaluate diaphragm thickness during breathing in athletes who suffer from non-specific lumbopelvic pain presents some measurement errors. The purpose of this study was to evaluate intra- and inter-sessions, intra- and inter-rater reliabilities, and concurrent validity of diaphragm thickness measurements during breathing using transcostal RUSI with a novel thoracic orthotic device that was used to fix the US probe versus those measurements obtained using manual fixation. A total of 37 athletes with non-specific lumbopelvic pain were recruited. Intra- (same examiner) and inter-rater (two examiners) and intra- (same day) and inter-session (alternate days) reliabilities were analyzed. All measurements were obtained after manual probe fixation and after positioning the thoracic orthotic device to fix the US probe in order to correctly correlate both measurement methods. Both left and right hemi-diaphragm thickness measurements were performed by transcostal RUSI at maximum inspiration, expiration, and the difference between the two parameters during relaxed breathing. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), standard errors of measurement (SEM), minimum detectable changes (MCD), systematic errors, and correlations () were assessed. Orthotic device probe fixation showed excellent reliability (ICC = 0.852-0.996, SEM = 0.0002-0.054, and MDC = 0.002-0.072), and most measurements did not show significant systematic errors ( > 0.05). Despite manual probe fixation with a reliability ranging from good to excellent (ICC = 0.714-0.997, SEM = 0.003-0.023, and MDC = 0.008-0.064 cm), several significant systematic measurement errors ( < 0.05) were found. Most significant correlations between both orthotic device and manual probe fixation methods were moderate ( = 0.486-0.718; < 0.05). Bland-Altman plots indicated adequate agreement between both measurement methods according to the agreement limits. The proposed novel thoracic orthotic device may allow ultrasound probe fixation to provide valid and reliable transcostal RUSI measurements of diaphragmatic thickness during relaxed breathing thus reducing some measurement errors and avoiding systematic measurement errors. It may be advisable to measure diaphragm thickness and facilitate visual biofeedback with respect to diaphragm re-education during normal breathing in athletes with non-specific lumbopelvic pain.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021
2021-06-24
2021
2021-06-24
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv journal article
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
dc.type.openaire.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/8596
url https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/8596
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
eng
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
language eng
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv open access
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
Atribución 3.0 España
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/
dc.rights.openaire.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv open access
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
Atribución 3.0 España
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv MDPI
publisher.none.fl_str_mv MDPI
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Docta Complutense
instname:Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)
instname_str Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)
reponame_str Docta Complutense
collection Docta Complutense
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869414945822605312
score 15.301603

Similares en LA Referencia