Ultrasound measures of intrinsic foot muscle size and motor activation following lateral ankle sprain and chronic ankle instability. A cross-sectional study

Fraser, John J.; Koldenhoven, Rachel M.; Hertel, Jay

doi:10.1101/2020.07.27.20163220

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 33 publications

(82 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A variety of IFM strength measurement methods have been explored, though with certain limitations. Previous methods include MRI, ultrasound, and EMG to obtain muscle volume, [13][14][15] cross-sectional area (CSA), [16][17][18]41 and muscle activity, 19 respectively. These characteristics have demonstrated relationships to muscle strength 42 and can provide insight about IFM function.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Researchers have approached IFM strength assessment in multiple ways, but these assessment methods are neither cost-friendly nor easily accessible by most clinicians. 2 For example, MRI, [13][14][15] ultrasound, [16][17][18] and EMG 19 have previously been used to assess IFM volume, cross-sectional area, and muscle activity respectively. These measures are considered a proxy for strength as no actual force output is obtained.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Novel Intrinsic Foot Muscle Strength Dynamometer Demonstrates Moderate-To-Excellent Reliability and Validity

Xu,

Goss,

Saliba

2023

International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Intrinsic foot muscle (IFM) weakness can result in reduced foot function, making it crucial for clinicians to track IFM strength changes accurately. However, assessing IFM strength can be challenging for clinicians, as there is no clinically applicable direct measure of IFM strength that has been shown to be reliable and valid with the foot on the ground. Purpose The purpose was to investigate the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of a novel, budget-friendly IFM dynamometer and determine its agreement with a handheld dynamometer (HHD). The researchers also examined correlations of foot morphology and activity level to IFM strength. Study design Descriptive Laboratory Study Methods Two assessors measured IFM strength of 34 healthy volunteers (4 male, 30 female; age=21.14±2.57, height=164.66 ±7.62 cm, mass=64.45±11.93 kg) on two occasions 6.62±0.78 days apart with the novel dynamometer to assess intra- and inter-rater reliability. The HHD was used to measure IFM in the first session in order to assess validity. Results For the novel dynamometer, intra- and inter-rater reliability was moderate-to-excellent (ICC = 0.73 – 0.95), and the majority of the strength tests were within the 95% limits of agreement with the HHD. Wider foot morphology and a higher number of days walking over the prior seven days had small but significant correlations with IFM strength (dominant foot r = 0.34, non-dominant foot r = 0.39; r = -0.33, -0.39 respectively). Conclusion This novel IFM dynamometer is a budget-friendly ($75) tool that was shown to be reliable and valid in a healthy population. Levels of evidence Level 3 ©The Author(s)

show abstract