Improving the reliability of measurements in orthopaedics and sports medicine

Abstract

A large space still exists for improving the measurements used in orthopaedics and sports medicine, especially as we face rapid technological progress in devices used for diagnostic or patient monitoring purposes. For a specific measure to be valuable and applicable in clinical practice, its reliability must be established. Reliability refers to the extent to which measurements can be replicated, and three types of reliability can be distinguished: inter-rater, intra-rater, and test–retest. The present article aims to provide insights into reliability as one of the most important and relevant properties of measurement tools. It covers essential knowledge about the methods used in orthopaedics and sports medicine for reliability studies. From design to interpretation, this article guides readers through the reliability study process. It addresses crucial issues such as the number of raters needed, sample size calculation, and breaks between particular trials. Different statistical methods and tests are presented for determining reliability depending on the type of gathered data, with particular attention to the commonly used intraclass correlation coefficient.

Ultrasound‐guided determination demonstrates influence of age, sex and type of sport on medial femoral condyle cartilage thickness in children and adolescents

“…They used ultrasound-guided examination as matched controls for comparison with the cartilage thickness measured by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In a first step, reliability of the ultrasound-guided approach for measuring the medial femur cartilage thickness was evaluated, since reliability of a diagnostic tool must be confirmed before its use in practice [21]. According to Cortina [6], reliability assessment should be interpreted as follows: Cronbach's α < 0.59: poor; 0.60-0.69: questionable; 0.70-0.79: acceptable; 0.80-0.89: good; 0.90-0.95: excellent, >0.95: possibly unnecessary items.…”

“…Due to this though, interinvestigator-related bias and its potential impact could not be assessed and evaluated within this single-performer study design. Moreover, test-retest studies cannot address investigator-related reliability issues [21]. However, interpersonal reproducibility was tested by Spannow et al by ultrasound-guided cartilage thickness assessment of a skilled and nonskilled investigator on a collective of 11 healthy children in different joints [42].…”

Assessment of Muscle Stiffness Using the MyotonPro: Effects of Fatigue on Vastus Lateralis and Medialis Muscles

“…While the reliability [ 19 ] of the MyotonPro has been explored in various studies, particularly in neurology [ 20 , 21 , 22 ], its consideration within the realm of maximal muscle fatigue and the potential influence of these muscle property alterations on its reliability has yet to be investigated [ 20 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 ]. This proves particularly intriguing, as long-term low-intensity running training fails to induce significant changes in stiffness [ 27 ].…”

The only constant in life is change: A moment of gratitude and respect for the past and a start for the new KSSTA team!

“…Under his guidance, KSSTA has tremendously grown in both the quantity and quality of submissions and publications, solidifying its position among the top 10 journals in the field of orthopaedics and sports traumatology. Jon Karlsson has always embraced and introduced new ways of disseminating the voice of KSSTA in the scientific community [1,5,8,[12][13][14], alongside leading numerous educational initiatives aimed at teaching younger, less skilled researchers with the basic publishing skills set needed [2,4,6,7,[9][10][11]. In addition, he has built a fantastic team of editors and associate editors for whom he served as a role model.…”