Research Centre for Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium.
J Athl Train. 2011 Jul-Aug;46(4):366-75. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-46.4.366.
Acceptable measurement stability during data collection is critically important to research. To interpret differences in measurement outcomes among participants or changes within participants after an intervention program, we need to know whether the measurement is stable and consistent.
To determine the within-session stability of muscle activation patterns for a voluntary postural-control task in a group of noninjured participants and a group of participants with chronic ankle instability (CAI).
Descriptive laboratory study.
Musculoskeletal laboratory.
Twenty control participants (8 men, 12 women; age = 21.8 ± 2.4 years, height = 164.3 ± 13.4 cm, mass = 68.4 ± 17.9 kg) and 20 participants with CAI (12 men, 8 women; age = 21.2 ± 2.1 years, height = 176 ± 10.2 cm, mass = 71.7 ± 11.3 kg).
INTERVENTION(S): Participants performed 4 barefoot standing trials, each of which included a 30-second double-legged stance followed by a 30-second single-legged stance in 3 conditions: with vision, without vision, and with vision on a balance pad.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The activity of 7 muscles of the lower limb was measured for the stance task in the 3 different conditions for each trial. The onset of muscle activity and muscle recruitment order were determined and compared between the first and the fourth trials for both groups and for each condition.
We found no differences in the onset of muscle activity among trials for both groups or for each condition. The measurement error was 0.9 seconds at maximum for the control group and 0.12 seconds for the CAI group. In the control group, 70% to 80% of the participants used the same muscle recruitment order in both trials. In the CAI group, 75% to 90% used the same recruitment order.
Within 1 session, measurement stability for this task was acceptable for use in further research. Furthermore, no differences were found in measurement stability across conditions in the control or CAI groups.
在数据收集过程中,可接受的测量稳定性对于研究至关重要。为了解释参与者之间的测量结果差异或干预计划后参与者内部的变化,我们需要知道测量是否稳定一致。
确定一组无损伤参与者和一组慢性踝关节不稳定(CAI)参与者在自愿姿势控制任务中的肌肉激活模式的会话内稳定性。
描述性实验室研究。
肌肉骨骼实验室。
20 名对照组参与者(8 名男性,12 名女性;年龄=21.8±2.4 岁,身高=164.3±13.4cm,体重=68.4±17.9kg)和 20 名 CAI 参与者(12 名男性,8 名女性;年龄=21.2±2.1 岁,身高=176±10.2cm,体重=71.7±11.3kg)。
参与者进行了 4 次赤脚站立试验,每个试验包括 30 秒的双腿站立,然后在 3 种条件下进行 30 秒的单腿站立:有视觉、无视觉和在平衡垫上有视觉。
在每个试验的 3 种不同条件下,测量了下肢 7 块肌肉的站立任务的活动。确定并比较了两组在每个条件下的前 4 次试验中肌肉活动的起始时间和肌肉募集顺序。
我们发现两组或每组的试验中肌肉活动的起始时间均无差异。对照组的测量误差最大为 0.9 秒,CAI 组为 0.12 秒。在对照组中,70%至 80%的参与者在两次试验中使用相同的肌肉募集顺序。在 CAI 组中,75%至 90%的参与者使用相同的募集顺序。
在 1 次会话内,该任务的测量稳定性可接受进一步研究使用。此外,在对照组或 CAI 组中,在不同条件下,测量稳定性没有差异。