Background The leg muscles are important for balance, posture, and movement during static and dynamic activity. Obtaining cross-sectional area measurements (CSA) of the leg muscles helps researchers understand the health and force production capability of individual leg muscles. Therefore, having an easy to use and readily available method to assess leg muscle CSA is needed. Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare the magnitude, repeatability, and validity of CSA measurements of select leg muscles from ultrasound (US) and the current gold standard, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Methods 20 healthy volunteers participated in this study. Each participant was imaged via US and MRI. The muscles of interest obtained on each participant consisted of the tibialis anterior at both 30 and 50% of the shank length, tibialis posterior at both 30 and 50% of the shank length, the flexor digitorum longus, the fibularis (peroneus) longus, and the fibularis (peroneus) brevis. Results Strong Pearson correlations were seen for all of the muscles when comparing US to MRI with a range from .7840 to .9676. For all measurements, standard error of the measurement ranged from .003 to 0.260 cm2. Minimum detectable difference for muscle measurements ranged from .008 cm2 for MRI fibularis longus and fibularis brevis to .693 cm2 for MRI of tibialis anterior at 30%. US minimum detectable difference ranged from .125 cm2 for the tibialis posterior muscle at 30% to .449 cm2 for the tibialis anterior muscle at 50%. Conclusions Based on these results ultrasound is a valid method to obtain CSA of muscles of the leg when compared with MRI.

Purpose Intrinsic foot muscles maintain foot structural integrity and contribute to functional movement, posture and balance. Thus, assessing intrinsic foot muscle size and strength are important. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to accurately image the individual muscles but is costly and time consuming. Ultrasound (US) imaging may provide an alternative that is less costly and more readily available. The purpose of this study was to investigate the validity and intratester reliability of US imaging in measuring intrinsic foot muscle size in comparison to MRI. Methods US and MRI were employed to measure the intrinsic foot muscle size involving 35 participants (females = 13; males = 22). The scanned intrinsic foot muscles included the flexor hallucis brevis (FHB), abductor hallucis (ABDH), flexor digitorum brevis (FDB), quadratus plantae (QP) and abductor digiti minimi (ADM). Pearson product correlation (r), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of the measurement (SEm) and minimal detectable difference (MDD) were calculated. Results High correlations were detected between the US and MRI cross-sectional area (CSA) measurements (r = .971 to 0.995). Test reliability was excellent for both MRI and US (ICC = 0.994 to 0.999). Limits of agreement between MRI and US measurements from ranged from 5.7 to 12.2% of muscle size. SEm values for US ranged from 0.026 to 0.044 cm2, while the SEm for MRI ranged from 0.018 to 0.023 cm2. MDD values for US ranged from 0.073 to 0.122 cm2, while MRI ranged from 0.045 to 0.064 cm2. Conclusions US appears to be a valid and reliable alternative to MRI when measuring intrinsic foot muscle CSA. While US is less costly and more readily available, the MRI results were shown to be slightly more precise.

No abstract

No abstract

BACKGROUND: The multifidus muscle is important in spine stabilization. Atrophy of the multifidus muscle has been associated with low back pain. OBJECTIVE: To examine multifidus muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) adaptations over two volleyball seasons and one off-season in volleyball athletes experiencing low back pain or no low back pain. METHODS: Twelve female NCAA division 1 volleyball athletes participated. Athletes were placed into a low back pain or no low back pain group. Athlete’s multifidus was imaged and measured using ultrasound at four time points across seasons. Imaging time points were before season one, following season one, following off-season, and following season two. A single level mixed-model analysis of variance was used for all analyses. A Tukey HSD post hoc test was used to determine differences between and within the low back pain and the no low back pain groups. RESULTS: Following off-season training the pain group had clinically significant smaller multifidus CSA at the L4 (-2.36 cm2 difference or 17.5%) and L5 (-2.40 cm2 or 12.5%) levels. Non-significant (p> 0.05) decreases in multifidus CSA were seen in both groups following season one and two. Athletes with pain had decreased multifidus CSA at the L4 and L5 vertebral levels at all time points which was non-significant (p> 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Clinically significant decreases in multifidus CSA occurred in female volleyball athletes with low back pain at the L4 and L5 level following off-season training. Volleyball athletes with pain had smaller multifidus CSA averages at all time points measured of the two year period.