Search

Context: Decreased trunk neuromuscular control is a risk factor for both upper- and lower-extremity injuries, yet there are few reliable and valid clinical tests to identify deficits. Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability and known-groups validity of a novel clinical test, the seated trunk control test (STCT). Design: Cross-sectional reliability and known-groups validity study. Setting: Laboratory. Participants: 89 unique participants: 34 were 3 months postoperative anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and 55 healthy controls. Methods: For the STCT, participants sat on a balance board with their eyes closed for three 30-second trials while investigators counted balance errors. Intraclass correlations (ICCs) were used to assess interrater reliability (N = 20) and test–retest reliability (N = 40). To assess known-groups validity, independent t tests were used to compare STCT errors at 3 months post-ACLR with healthy matched controls (N = 34/group). Area under a receiver operating characteristic curve identified an optimal cutoff for distinguishing between groups. Results: The STCT had perfect interrater reliability (ICC2,3 = 1.00) and good test–retest reliability (ICC3,3 =.79; 95% confidence interval =.61–.89). The ACLR group made significantly more errors on the STCT (mean [SD] = 15.5 [5.4]) than controls (mean [SD] = 8.2 [4.1]; P <.001, Cohen d = 1.52). The STCT's ability to distinguish between groups was excellent (area under a ROC curve = 0.86). A cutoff of 12 errors maximized sensitivity (76%) and specificity (85%). Conclusions: The STCT is reliable between raters and across days. It also has excellent ability to distinguish between individuals with a recent ACLR and healthy matched controls, which provides initial evidence to suggest that the STCT may be clinically useful for identifying deficits in trunk neuromuscular control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: An easy-to-administer, function-based questionnaire to assess patients with various foot problems was required for a Greek-speaking population. This study aimed to translate and cross-culturally adapt the Quick Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (Quick-FAAM) into Greek and evaluate its reliability and validity. Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Established international guidelines for the cross-cultural adaptation of questionnaires were followed. The face and content validity of the Greek version of the Quick-FAAM (Quick-FAAM-GR), as well as the internal consistency and test-retest reliability upon repeated administration after 5 days, were examined. In addition, the construct validity of the scale was examined via exploratory factor analysis as well as by testing for associations with the Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index, the 12-item Short-Form Survey (version 2), and a functional balance assessment test--the Y-Balance Test. Results: Sixty participants (18 women) with self-reported chronic ankle instability symptoms, with a median (interquartile range) age of 27 (7.7) years, participated in the study. Half of the participants were included in the test-retest reliability study. The Quick-FAAM-GR demonstrated face and content validity. Excellent internal consistency (Cronbach a =.961) and intrarater test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient ICC[2,1] = .93) were demonstrated, with a comparable error margin to the original version (standard error of the measurement = 2.1, 95% minimum detectable change = 5.9). Associations of the Quick-FAAM-GR scores to other questionnaires ranged from weak to strong (Spearman rho), all being statistically significant (Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index from -.26, P = .04, to -.67, P< .001, and 12-item Short-Form Survey, version 2, between .41 and .72, P<.001), and to the Y-Balance Test between lower-limb differences (-.35 to -.58, P< .001). The exploratory factor analysis confirmed the single- factor structure of this scale. No floor/ceiling effects were observed. Conclusions: The Greek Quick-FAAM has proven to be a valid and reliable tool for evaluating chronic ankle instability and can be used for clinical and research purposes in Greek- speaking individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Approximately 1 to 1.4 million individuals (0.58% of the population) in the United States identify as transgender, yet no literature could be found regarding how researchers should adapt clinical research studies when intersex or transgender individuals volunteer as participants. Therefore, the objective was to determine if there is a consensus among recently published researchers in 3 athletic training and sports medicine journals regarding procedures used to categorize participants and data of transgender or intersex individuals in a research study. Methods: The authors developed a 14-item survey using Qualtrics XM to assess how researchers categorize individuals and their data when intersex or transgender individuals volunteer to participate in clinical research studies that are not intended to focus on intersex or transgender individuals. The survey was sent to 378 individuals in athletic training and related fields who recently published research manuscripts from 2018 to 2020 in one or more of 3 leading journals in the field including the Journal of Athletic Training, the Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, and the Athletic Training and Sports Health Care Journal. Results: A total of 82 respondents completed the survey, yielding a response rate of 21.69%. When categorizing research participants who were not using hormones or surgery to transition, several respondents were unsure how to categorize transgender individuals (n = 14, 17.1%) or intersex individuals (n = 35, 42.7%). If the research participant was using hormones and/or surgery to transition, many respondents were unsure how to categorize the sex of the individual (n = 27, 32.9%). Only 5 (6.1%) respondents indicated that their organization has policies that guide their inclusion of transgender and/or intersex individuals in research studies. Conclusions: There does not appear to be consensus among researchers who recently published in athletic training and sports medicine journals regarding how to categorize transgender and intersex individuals who volunteer to participate in research studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Instrument-assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization (IASTM) is a therapeutic intervention used by clinicians to identify and treat myofascial dysfunction or pathology. However, little is known about the amount of force used by clinicians during an IASTM treatment and how it compares to reports of force in the current literature. Objective: To quantify the range of force applied by trained clinicians during a simulated IASTM treatment scenario. Design: Experimental. Setting: University research laboratory. Participants: Eleven licensed clinicians (physical therapist = 2, chiropractor = 2, and athletic trainer = 7) with professional IASTM training participated in the study. The participants reported a range of credentialed experience from 1 to 15 years (mean = 7 [4.7] y; median = 6 y). Intervention: Participants performed 15 one-handed unidirectional sweeping strokes with each of the 5 instruments for a total of 75 data points each. Force data were collected from a force plate with an attached skin simulant during a hypothetical treatment scenario. Main Outcome Measures: Peak force and average forces for individual strokes across all instruments were identified. Averages for these forces were calculated for all participants combined, as well as for individual participants. Results: The average of peak forces produced by our sample of trained clinicians was 6.7 N and the average mean forces was 4.5 N. Across individual clinicians, average peak forces ranged from 2.6 to 14.0 N, and average mean forces ranged from 1.6 to 10.0 N. Conclusions: The clinicians in our study produced a broad range of IASTM forces. The observed forces in our study were similar to those reported in prior research examining an IASTM treatment to the gastrocnemius of healthy individuals and greater than what has been reported as effective in treating delayed onset muscle soreness. Our data can be used by researchers examining clinically relevant IASTM treatment force on patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Ultrasound imaging is a clinically feasible tool to assess femoral articular cartilage and may have utility in tracking early knee osteoarthritis development. Traditional assessment techniques focus on measurements at a single location, which can be challenging to adopt for novice raters. Objective: To introduce a novel semiautomated ultrasound segmentation technique and determine the intrarater and interrater reliability of average regional femoral articular cartilage thickness and echo intensity of a novice and expert rater. Design: Descriptive observational study. Setting: Orthopedic clinic. Patients or Other Participants: Fifteen participants (mean [SD]; age 23.5 [4.6] y, height = 172.6 [9.3] cm, mass = 79.8 [15.7] kg) with a unilateral history of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction participated. Intervention: None. Main Outcome Measures: One rater captured anterior femoral cartilage images of the participants’ contralateral knees using a transverse suprapatellar ultrasound assessment. The total femoral cartilage cross-sectional area of each image was segmented by a novice and expert rater. A novel custom program automatically separated the cartilage segmentations into medial, lateral, and intercondylar regions to determine the crosssectional area and cartilage length. The average cartilage thickness in each region was calculated by dividing the cross-sectional area by the cartilage length. Echo intensity was calculated as the average gray-scale pixel value of each region. Two-way random effect intraclass correlations coefficient (ICC) for absolute agreement were used to determine the interrater reliability between a novice and expert rater, as well as the intrarater reliability of the novice rater. Results: The novice rater demonstrated excellent intrarater (ICC [2,k] range = .993–.997) and interrater (ICC [2,k] range = .944–.991) reliability with the expert rater of all femoral articular cartilage average thickness and echo intensity regions. Conclusions: The novel semiautomated average cartilage thickness and echo-intensity assessment is efficient, systematic, and reliable between an expert and novice rater with minimal training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Decreased trunk neuromuscular control is a risk factor for both upper- and lower-extremity injuries, yet there are few reliable and valid clinical tests to identify deficits., Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability and known-groups validity of a novel clinical test, the seated trunk control test (STCT)., Design: Cross-sectional reliability and known-groups validity study., Setting: Laboratory., Participants: 89 unique participants: 34 were 3 months postoperative anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and 55 healthy controls., Methods: For the STCT, participants sat on a balance board with their eyes closed for three 30-second trials while investigators counted balance errors. Intraclass correlations (ICCs) were used to assess interrater reliability (N = 20) and test-retest reliability (N = 40). To assess known-groups validity, independent t tests were used to compare STCT errors at 3 months post-ACLR with healthy matched controls (N = 34/group). Area under a receiver operating characteristic curve identified an optimal cutoff for distinguishing between groups., Results: The STCT had perfect interrater reliability (ICC2,3 = 1.00) and good test-retest reliability (ICC3,3 = .79; 95% confidence interval = .61-.89). The ACLR group made significantly more errors on the STCT (mean [SD] = 15.5 [5.4]) than controls (mean [SD] = 8.2 [4.1]; P < .001, Cohen d = 1.52). The STCT's ability to distinguish between groups was excellent (area under a ROC curve = 0.86). A cutoff of 12 errors maximized sensitivity (76%) and specificity (85%)., Conclusions: The STCT is reliable between raters and across days. It also has excellent ability to distinguish between individuals with a recent ACLR and healthy matched controls, which provides initial evidence to suggest that the STCT may be clinically useful for identifying deficits in trunk neuromuscular control.

Context:   Clinical assessment of scapular motion is obscured by a lack of clinically accessible and feasible angular measurement tools. This study evaluates the reliability and validity of the smartphone "Clinometer" app in measuring scapular upward rotation (UR) and anteroposterior tilt., Design: Psychometric analysis., Methods: We recruited 57 participants-10 with and 47 without shoulder pain. Two physical therapists consecutively measured both scapular movements using the Clinometer app at the arm by the side (rest), 30°, 60°, 90°, and 120° of humeral elevation in the scapular plane; one therapist measured again after 2 days. For evaluating concurrent validity, we compared the Clinometer scores with those measured using an electromagnetic motion capture system in 10 healthy participants. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) with standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable difference at 90% confidence intervals (MDD90) were calculated. Concurrent validity was evaluated using repeated-measures analysis of variance followed by post hoc testing with Tukey-Kramer test (P < .05)., Results: We observed good intrarater reliability (ICC: UR = .76-.85, tilt = .69-.9; SEM: 2.2°-3.5°; MDD90: ∼5°-8°) and moderate to good interrater reliability (ICC: UR = .66-.78, tilt = .66-.76; SEM: 3.6°-8°; MDD90: ∼9°-18°) for both rotations. The Clinometer scores for UR were comparable to electromagnetic motion capture system at all angles except 90° (difference ∼8°); for scapular tilt, the scores were comparable only at rest and 30° elevation., Conclusion: The Clinometer app is reliable and valid for measuring scapular UR throughout and for scapular tilt at lower humeral elevation angles. The MDD90 values for scapular rotations computed in this study can be helpful in rehabilitation planning and future research.

Context: Handheld dynamometry is a feasible, reliable, and cost-effective method for assessing shoulder strength. One limitation to this tool is the lack of standardized testing protocols and specified shoulder strength test positions. Although it is recommended that strength tests be performed in a gravity-eliminated position, this may not always be a feasible or practical testing protocol. There is limited research on the influence of gravity on strength measures; to our knowledge, no study has compared handheld dynamometry shoulder strength assessments based on body position and gravity. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare shoulder flexion, extension, and abduction strength assessed via handheld dynamometry between a gravity-eliminated and a gravity-influenced test position., Design: This study was a comparison of shoulder strength based on test position. The test position was the independent variable, and the dependent variables were shoulder flexion, extension, and abduction strength., Methods: Supine (gravity-eliminated) and seated (gravity-influenced) strength measures were assessed in 20 healthy adults (19.4 [1.2] y) on the dominant arm. Paired t tests were used to determine differences between body positions for each test. Significance was accepted at P ≤ .05., Results: There were no differences between supine and seated flexion and extension measures. Absolute supine shoulder abduction scores (152.5 [58.4] N) were significantly higher than seated scores (139.9 [55.6] N)., Conclusions: Findings show that gravity should be considered when using handheld dynamometry scores as indicators of abductor shoulder strength and function.