1 Department of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Unit of Physiotherapy, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
2 Quebec Heart and Lung Institute Research Centre, Faculty of medicine, Laval University, Quebec city, Canada.
Chron Respir Dis. 2019 Jan-Dec;16:1479973118816497. doi: 10.1177/1479973118816497.
The aims were to determine reliability and feasibility of measurements to assess quadriceps endurance in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Sixty participants (forced expiratory volume in one second (mean ± standard deviation) 55 ± 18% of predicted, age 67 ± 8 years) were tested in an inter-day, test-retest design. Isokinetic, isometric, and isotonic protocols were performed using a computerized dynamometer. Test-retest relative and absolute reliability was determined via intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), coefficient of variation (CV%), and limits of agreement (LoA%). Isokinetic total work demonstrated very high relative reliability (ICC: [95% confidence interval] = 0.98 [0.94-0.99]) and the best absolute reliability (CV% (LoA%) = 6.5% (18.0%)). Isokinetic fatigue index, isometric, and isotonic measures demonstrated low-to-high relative reliability (ICC = 0.64 [0.46-0.77], 0.88 [0.76-0.94], 0.91 [0.85-0.94]), and measures of absolute reliability (CV% (LoA%)) were 20.3% (56.4%), 14.9% (40.8%), and 15.8% (43.1%). For isokinetic total work and isometric measurements, participants performed better on retest (4.8% and 10.0%, respectively). The feasibility was similar across protocols with an average time consumption of less than 7.5 minutes. In conclusion, isokinetic, isometric, and isotonic measurements of quadriceps endurance were feasible to a similar extent and presented low-to-very high relative reliability. Absolute reliability seems to favor isokinetic total work measurements.
目的是确定评估慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者股四头肌耐力的测量方法的可靠性和可行性。60 名参与者(一秒用力呼气容积(平均±标准差)为预计值的 55±18%,年龄 67±8 岁)按照日内、测试-再测试设计进行了测试。使用计算机测力计进行等速、等长和等张协议。通过组内相关系数(ICC)、变异系数(CV%)和界限值(LoA)来确定测试-再测试的相对和绝对可靠性。等速总功显示出非常高的相对可靠性(ICC:[95%置信区间] = 0.98 [0.94-0.99])和最佳的绝对可靠性(CV%(LoA%)= 6.5%(18.0%))。等速疲劳指数、等长和等张测量显示出低至高的相对可靠性(ICC = 0.64 [0.46-0.77]、0.88 [0.76-0.94]、0.91 [0.85-0.94]),绝对可靠性测量(CV%(LoA%))分别为 20.3%(56.4%)、14.9%(40.8%)和 15.8%(43.1%)。对于等速总功和等长测量,参与者在重测时表现更好(分别为 4.8%和 10.0%)。各方案的可行性相似,平均用时均少于 7.5 分钟。总之,股四头肌耐力的等速、等长和等张测量具有相似的可行性,相对可靠性较低至高。绝对可靠性似乎更倾向于等速总功测量。