Jamaiyah H, Geeta A, Safiza M N, Wong N F, Kee C C, Ahmad A Z, Suzana S, Rahmah R, Khor G L, Ruzita A T, Chen W S, Rajaah M, Faudzi A
Clinical Research Centre, Hospital Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Malays J Nutr. 2008 Sep;14(2):137-50. Epub 2008 Sep 15.
This study sought to examine the reliability of two measurements; Calf Circumference (CC) and Mid-half Arm Span (MHAS). A sample of 130 elderly persons aged 60 years and above seen consecutively in the Kuala Lumpur Hospital outpatient clinic during the period of December 2005 to January 2006, upon consent, were recruited to the study. There was a high degree of reliability for both inter- and intra-examiner (r close to 1). For inter-examiner, on average the CC measurements taken by the first examiner were 0.3 cm lower than that of the second examiner. The upper and lower limit of the differences were +0.4 to -0.9 cm respectively. Inter-examiner MHAS measurements on average by the first examiner were 0.2 cm lower than that of the second examiner. The limits were +1.7 to -2.1 cm. By comparison, the inter-examiner CC measurements were more reliable than the MHAS measurements. For intra-examiner, on average the CC measurements at Time 1 were consistent with Time 2 (mean difference=0) with limits of the difference at + 0.5 cm. MHAS measurements at Time 1 were on average 0.1 cm less than at Time 2 with limits at +1.7 and -1.8 cm. The technical error of measurement (TEM) and coefficient of variation of CC and MHAS for both interexaminer and intra-examiner measurements were within acceptable limits with the exception of MHAS TEM. This study suggests that CC and MHAS measured in elderly persons 60 years and above, using Seca Circumference Tape ® 206, Germany (0.05 cm) are reliable and can be used in a community survey.
本研究旨在检验两项测量指标的可靠性,即小腿围(CC)和半臂中距(MHAS)。2005年12月至2006年1月期间,在吉隆坡医院门诊连续就诊的130名60岁及以上的老年人,经同意后被纳入本研究。检查者间和检查者内的可靠性都很高(r接近1)。对于检查者间,第一位检查者测量的CC平均比第二位检查者低0.3厘米。差异的上限和下限分别为+0.4至-0.9厘米。第一位检查者测量的检查者间MHAS平均比第二位检查者低0.2厘米。差异范围为+1.7至-2.1厘米。相比之下,检查者间CC测量比MHAS测量更可靠。对于检查者内,平均而言,第1次测量的CC与第2次一致(平均差异=0),差异范围为+0.5厘米。第1次测量的MHAS平均比第2次少0.1厘米,差异范围为+1.7和-1.8厘米。除了MHAS的测量技术误差(TEM)外,检查者间和检查者内测量的CC和MHAS的测量技术误差(TEM)和变异系数均在可接受范围内。本研究表明,使用德国Seca周长卷尺®206(精度0.05厘米)对60岁及以上老年人测量的CC和MHAS是可靠的,可用于社区调查。