组内相关
协议限制
标准误差
可靠性(半导体)
淋巴水肿
核医学
数学
医学
相关系数
体积热力学
再现性
统计
物理
内科学
功率(物理)
量子力学
癌症
乳腺癌
作者
Charlotta Jönsson,Karin Johansson,Maria Bjurberg,Christina Brogårdh
出处
期刊:Lymphatic Research and Biology
[Mary Ann Liebert]
日期:2022-11-24
被引量:3
标识
DOI:10.1089/lrb.2022.0032
摘要
Introduction: Circumferential measurements (CMs) every 4th cm are commonly used to assess lower limb volume (LLV), but fewer measurements would be less time-consuming. The aim of this study was therefore to establish the agreement between LLV measurements derived from CM every 4th cm (V4), 8th cm (V8), and 12th cm (V12), and to evaluate the intrarater test–retest reliability for each of the three measurement methods in persons with lower limb lymphedema (LLL). Methods and Results: Forty-two persons with unilateral or bilateral LLL were measured twice, 2 weeks apart. Volume measurements for the V4, V8, and V12 methods were derived using CM. The agreement was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC3.1) and Bland–Altman graphs including 95% limits of agreement (LOA). The reliability was evaluated using ICC2.1 and standard error of measurement (SEM%) and smallest real difference (SRD%). The agreement was high for the V4 and V8 methods (ICC 0.999), and for the V4 and V12 methods (ICC 0.998). The graphs revealed slightly higher agreement between the V4 and V8 than between the V4 and V12 methods visualized by the 95% LOA (−117 to 62 and −236 to 132 mL, respectively). For all three measurement methods, the test–retest reliability was high (ICC 0.993–0.995) and the measurement error low (SEM%: 1.2%–1.4% and SRD%: 3.4%–3.8%). Conclusions: The higher agreement between the V4 and V8 methods than between V4 and V12, and the high test–retest reliability in LLV measurements support the V8 method to replace the V4 method in persons with LLL.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI