Evidence Hub

Reliability of force per unit cross-sectional area measurements of the first dorsal interosseus muscle

Dan Martin, S. Cooper, C. Sale, G. Compton, K. Elliott-Sale

Jurnal sport science, 2015

2 citations

Abstract

Abstract The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability of maximum voluntary isometric force (MVIF), cross-sectional area (CSA) and force per unit CSA measures, of the first dorsal interosseus (FDI) muscle, using a custom-built dynamometer and ultrasonography. Twenty-seven participants completed MVIF and CSA measurements on two separate occasions under the same conditions. Reliability was determined using paired samples t-tests, systematic bias ratio and ratio limits of agreement (RLoA), intra-class correlation (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV). MVIF of the FDI muscle (mean ± s; 31.8 ± 7.6 N and 31.6 ± 7.3 N) was not different between trials (P = 0.63); RLoA between trials were 1.00 ×/÷ 1.09, ICC = 0.990 and CV = 3.22%. CSA of the FDI muscle (22.6 ± 6.9 and 22.9 ± 6.9 mm2) was also not different between trials (P = 0.31); RLoA between trials were 0.98 ×/÷ 1.19, ICC = 0.979 and CV = 6.61%. Force per unit CSA was not different between trials (1.49 ± 0.43 and 1.46 ± 0.44 N·mm2; P = 0.18), RLoA were 1.02 ×/÷ 1.17, ICC = 0.985 and CV = 5.76%. The techniques used to determine MVIF and CSA of the FDI muscle were reliable and can be combined to calculate force per unit CSA.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free