• J Manipulative Physiol Ther · Feb 2013

    Test-retest reliability, repeatability, and sensitivity of an automated deformation-controlled indentation on pressure pain threshold measurement.

    • Terry K Koo, Jing-yi Guo, and Cameron M Brown.
    • Foot Levelers Biomechanics Research Laboratory, Research Department, New York Chiropractic College, Seneca Falls, NY 13148-3204, USA. tkoo@nycc.edu
    • J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2013 Feb 1;36(2):84-90.

    ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to construct a computerized deformation-controlled indentation system and compare its test-retest reliability, repeatability, and sensitivity with a manual algometer for pressure pain threshold (PPT) measurements.MethodsPressure pain threshold measurements were made on 16 healthy subjects for 2 sessions on bilateral erector spinae muscles at L1, L3, and L5 spinal levels, consisting of 5 repeated trials each using computerized algometry on one side and manual algometry on the other side. Mean, SD, coefficient of variation, standard error of measurement, minimal detectable change, and intraclass correlation coefficient were calculated for both manual and computerized PPT measurements. Effects of session, level, method, and side on PPT measurements were evaluated using analysis of variance.ResultsManual PPT measurements were significantly larger than computerized PPT measurements (P = .017), and session 2 was significantly larger than session 1 (P = .021). Coefficient of variation, intraclass correlation coefficient, standard error of measurement, and minimal detectable change of the manual and computerized PPT measurements were 10.3%, 0.91, 0.19 kg/cm(2), and 0.54 kg/cm(2) and 15.6%, 0.87, 0.26 kg/cm(2), and 0.73 kg/cm(2), respectively.ConclusionsAlthough computerized algometry offers the benefits of eliminating the effects of operator reaction time, operator anticipation, alignment error, and variation in indentation rate on PPT measurements, these results indicate that manual algometry using load-controlled strategy may be better than computerized deformation-controlled algometry in terms of test-retest reliability, repeatability, and sensitivity. Constant load-controlled indentation protocol may be more favorable for PPT measurements. Future computerized instrumentation for PPT measurements should adopt a load-controlled mechanism.Copyright © 2013 National University of Health Sciences. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…