The accuracy of the palpation meter (PALM) for measuring pelvic crest height difference and leg length discrepancy
The accuracy of the palpation meter (PALM) for measuring pelvic crest height difference and leg length discrepancy
复制标题
DOI：
10.2519/jospt.2003.33.6.319
复制
发表时间：
2003-06-01
影响因子：
6.1
通讯作者：
Garber, MP
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Petrone, MR;Guinn, J;Garber, MP
研究设计：重测信度和效度。目的：确定触诊仪 (PALM) 的效度和信度。背景：下肢长度差异 (LLD) 与多种肌肉骨骼疾病有关。因此，LLD的临床测量已成为体检的常规且重要的组成部分。 PALM 是最近开发的一种用于间接测量 LLD 的仪器，但对其测量特性知之甚少。 方法和措施： 15 名健康受试者和 15 名疑似 LLD 的有症状受试者参与了本研究。骨盆嵴高度差 (PD) 的测量结果由 2 位检查者使用 PALM 获得。拍摄每位受试者骨盆的站立前后位（AP）X光片，并根据X光片确定PD和LLD（股骨头高度差），以便与PALM值进行比较。计算组内相关系数 (ICC) 以确定 PALM 的有效性和可靠性估计。结果：对于所有受试者，与骨盆站立 AP X 线照片相比，PALM 对 PD 的有效性估计 (ICC2,3) 非常出色（评估者 1 为 0.90，评估者 2 为 0.92）。作为 LLD 的间接估计，PALM 的准确性较低（评分者 1 和 2 的 ICC2,3 分别为 0.76 和 0.78）。每个评估者的评估者内可靠性都非常出色（ICC2,3 = 0.97 和 0.98），评估者间可靠性也非常好（ICC2,3 = 0.88）。结论：PALM 是一种可靠且有效的 PD 测量工具。临床医生应考虑将这种方便、经济有效的临床工具作为骨盆嵴高度差的放射线测量的替代方法。
Study Design: Test-retest reliability and validity.Objective: To determine the validity and reliability of the Palpation Meter (PALM).Background: Leg length discrepancy (LLD) has been associated with a variety of musculoskeletal disorders. Therefore, the clinical measurement of LLD has become a routine and important part of the physical examination. The PALM is an instrument that was recently developed to indirectly measure LLD, but little is known about its measurement properties.Methods and Measures: Fifteen healthy and 15 symptomatic subjects with suspected LLD participated in this study. Measurements of pelvic crest height difference (PD) were obtained by 2 examiners using the PALM. A standing antero-posterior (AP) radiograph of each subject's pelvis was taken, and PD and LLD (femoral head height difference) were determined from the radiograph for comparison with the PALM values. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to determine the validity and reliability estimates of the PALM.Results: For all subjects, the validity estimates (ICC2,3) of the PALM for PD were excellent (0.90 for rater 1 and 0.92 for rater 2) when compared with the standing AP radiograph of the pelvis. The PALM was less accurate (ICC2,3 of 0.76 and 0.78 for rater 1 and 2, respectively) as an indirect estimate of LLD. Intrarater reliability for each rater was excellent (ICC2,3 = 0.97 and 0.98) and interrater reliability was very good (ICC2,3 = 0.88).Conclusion: The PALM is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring PD. Clinicians should consider this convenient, cost-effective clinical tool as an alternative to radiographic measurement of pelvic crest height difference.