Suppr超能文献

槌状趾畸形角度和胫骨扭转测量方法的可靠性和有效性。

Reliability and validity of measures of hammer toe deformity angle and tibial torsion.

作者信息

Kwon O Y, Tuttle L J, Commean P K, Mueller M J

机构信息

Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health Science, Yonsei University, South Korea.

出版信息

Foot (Edinb). 2009 Sep;19(3):149-55. doi: 10.1016/j.foot.2009.03.004.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Measures of second-fourth metatarsophalangeal joint (MTPJ) angle (indicator of hammer toe deformity) and clinical measures of tibial torsion have limited evidence for validity and reliability. The purposes of this study are to determine: (1) reliability of using a 3D digitizer (Metrecom) and computed tomography (CT) to measure MTPJ angle for toes 2-4; (2) reliability of goniometer, 3D digitizer, and CT to measure tibial torsion; (3) validity of MTPJ angle measures for toes 2-4 using goniometry and 3D digitizer compared to CT (gold standard) and (4) validity of tibial torsion measures using goniometry and 3D digitizer (Metrecom) compared to CT (gold standard).

METHODS

Twenty-nine subjects participated in this study. 27 feet with hammer toe deformity and 31 feet without hammer toe deformity were tested using standardized gonimetric, 3D digitizer and CT methods. ICCs (3,1), standard error of the measurement (SEM) values, and difference measures were used to characterize intrarater reliability. Pearson correlation coefficients and an analysis of variance were used to determine associations and differences between the measurement techniques.

FINDINGS

3D digitizer and CT measures of MTPJ angle had high test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.95-0.96 and 0.98-0.99, respectively; SEM = 2.64-3.35 degrees and 1.42-1.47 degrees, respectively). Goniometry, 3D digitizer, and CT measures of tibial torsion had good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.75, 0.85, and 0.98, respectively; SEM = 2.15 degrees, 1.74 degrees, and 0.72 degree, respectively). Both goniometric and 3D digitizer measures of MTPJ angle were highly correlated with CT measures of MTPJ angle (r = 0.84-0.90, r = 0.84-0.88, respectively) and tibial torsion (r = 0.72, r = 0.83). Goniometry, 3D digitizer, and CT measures were all different from each other for measures of hammer toe deformity (p < 0.001). Goniometry measures were different from CT measures and 3D digitizer measures of tibial torsion (p < 0.002). CT measures and 3D digitizer measures of tibial torsion were similar (p = 0.112).

INTERPRETATIONS

These results suggest that 3D digitizer and CT scan measures of MTPJ angle and goniometric, 3D digitizer, and CT scan measures of tibial torsion are reliable. Goniometer and 3D digitizer measures of MTPJ angle and tibial torsion measures are highly correlated with the gold standard CT method indicating good validity of measures, but the measures are not interchangeable.

摘要

背景

第二至第四跖趾关节(MTPJ)角度(锤状趾畸形指标)的测量方法以及胫骨扭转的临床测量方法在有效性和可靠性方面的证据有限。本研究的目的是确定:(1)使用三维数字化仪(Metrecom)和计算机断层扫描(CT)测量第2至4趾MTPJ角度的可靠性;(2)使用测角仪、三维数字化仪和CT测量胫骨扭转的可靠性;(3)与CT(金标准)相比,使用测角法和三维数字化仪测量第2至4趾MTPJ角度的有效性;(4)与CT(金标准)相比,使用测角法和三维数字化仪(Metrecom)测量胫骨扭转的有效性。

方法

29名受试者参与了本研究。使用标准化的测角法、三维数字化仪和CT方法对27例有锤状趾畸形的足和31例无锤状趾畸形的足进行了测试。组内相关系数(ICCs,3,1)、测量标准误(SEM)值和差异测量用于表征测量者内部的可靠性。使用Pearson相关系数和方差分析来确定测量技术之间的关联和差异。

结果

三维数字化仪和CT测量的MTPJ角度具有较高的重测可靠性(ICCs分别为0.95 - 0.96和0.98 - 0.99;SEM分别为2.64 - 3.35度和1.42 - 1.47度)。测角法、三维数字化仪和CT测量的胫骨扭转具有良好的重测可靠性(ICCs分别为0.75、0.85和0.98;SEM分别为2.15度、1.74度和0.72度)。测角法和三维数字化仪测量的MTPJ角度均与CT测量的MTPJ角度高度相关(r分别为0.84 - 0.90和0.84 - 0.88)以及与胫骨扭转高度相关(r分别为0.72和0.83)。对于锤状趾畸形的测量,测角法、三维数字化仪和CT测量结果彼此均不同(p < 0.001)。测角法测量结果与CT测量结果以及三维数字化仪测量的胫骨扭转结果不同(p < 0.002)。CT测量结果和三维数字化仪测量的胫骨扭转结果相似(p = 0.112)。

解读

这些结果表明,三维数字化仪和CT扫描测量的MTPJ角度以及测角法、三维数字化仪和CT扫描测量的胫骨扭转是可靠的。测角仪和三维数字化仪测量的MTPJ角度以及胫骨扭转测量结果与金标准CT方法高度相关,表明测量方法具有良好的有效性,但这些测量方法不可互换。

相似文献

1
Reliability and validity of measures of hammer toe deformity angle and tibial torsion.
Foot (Edinb). 2009 Sep;19(3):149-55. doi: 10.1016/j.foot.2009.03.004.
2
Muscle imbalance and reduced ankle joint motion in people with hammer toe deformity.
Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2009 Oct;24(8):670-5. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2009.05.010. Epub 2009 Jun 16.
3
A novel method of measuring passive quasi-stiffness in the first metatarsophalangeal joint.
J Foot Ankle Res. 2016 Oct 26;9:41. doi: 10.1186/s13047-016-0173-2. eCollection 2016.
4
Tibial torsion in cerebral palsy: validity and reliability of measurement.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Aug;467(8):2098-104. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-0705-1. Epub 2009 Jan 22.
5
A Validated, Automated, 3-Dimensional Method to Reliably Measure Tibial Torsion.
Am J Sports Med. 2021 Mar;49(3):747-756. doi: 10.1177/0363546520986873. Epub 2021 Feb 3.
7
Clinical assessment of tibial torsion differences. Do we always need a computed tomography?
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2022 Aug;48(4):3229-3235. doi: 10.1007/s00068-022-01884-4. Epub 2022 Feb 10.
8
9
Test-retest reliability of a clinical foot assessment device for measuring first metatarsophalangeal joint quasi-stiffness.
Foot (Edinb). 2020 Dec;45:101742. doi: 10.1016/j.foot.2020.101742. Epub 2020 Sep 13.

本文引用的文献

1
A comparison of ultrasound to goniometric and inclinometer measurements of torsion in the tibia and femur.
Gait Posture. 2008 Nov;28(4):708-10. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.04.017. Epub 2008 Jun 13.
3
The Footprint method to assess transmalleolar axis.
Gait Posture. 2007 Apr;25(4):597-603. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2006.06.011. Epub 2006 Aug 14.
5
Reliability of measures of impairments associated with patellofemoral pain syndrome.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006 Mar 31;7:33. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-7-33.
6
Foot small muscle atrophy is present before the detection of clinical neuropathy.
Diabetes Care. 2005 Jun;28(6):1425-30. doi: 10.2337/diacare.28.6.1425.
8
Reliability and validity of combined imaging and pressures assessment methods for diabetic feet.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 Apr;83(4):497-505. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2002.30923.
9
A comparison of four in vivo methods of measuring tibial torsion.
J Anat. 1998 Jul;193 ( Pt 1)(Pt 1):139-44. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-7580.1998.19310139.x.
10
Measurement of femoral antetorsion and tibial torsion by magnetic resonance imaging.
Br J Radiol. 1997 Jun;70(834):575-9. doi: 10.1259/bjr.70.834.9227249.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验