Echo-intensity, fatty infiltration, and morphology ultrasound imaging assessment in healthy and whiplash associated disorders populations: an observational study

Author(s):  
Juan Antonio Valera-Calero ◽  
Asis Al-Buqain-Ortega ◽  
José Luis Arias-Buría ◽  
César Fernández-de-las-Peñas ◽  
Umut Varol ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Juan Antonio Valera-Calero ◽  
José Luis Arias-Buría ◽  
César Fernández-de-las-Peñas ◽  
Joshua A. Cleland ◽  
Gracia María Gallego-Sendarrubias ◽  
...  

Spine ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 31 (22) ◽  
pp. E847-E855 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Elliott ◽  
Gwendolen Jull ◽  
Jon Timothy Noteboom ◽  
Ross Darnell ◽  
Graham Galloway ◽  
...  

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 2261
Author(s):  
Carmelo Pirri ◽  
Diego Guidolin ◽  
Caterina Fede ◽  
Veronica Macchi ◽  
Raffaele De Caro ◽  
...  

Knowledge about fasciae has become increasingly relevant in connection to regional anesthesiology, given the growing interest in fascial plane, interfascial, and nerve blocks. Ultrasound (US) imaging, thanks to high definition, provides the possibility to visualize and measure their thickness. The purpose of this study was to measure and compare, by US imaging, the thickness of deep/muscular fasciae in different points of the arm and forearm. An observational study has been performed using US imaging to measure brachial and antebrachial fasciae thickness at anterior and posterior regions, respectively, of the arm and forearm at different levels with a new protocol in a sample of 25 healthy volunteers. Results of fascial thickness revealed statistically significant differences (p < 0.0001) in the brachial fascia between the anterior and the posterior regions; in terms of the antebrachial fascia, no statistically significant difference was present (p > 0.05) between the regions/levels. Moreover, regarding the posterior region/levels, the brachial fascia had a greater thickness (mean 0.81 ± 0.20 mm) than the antebrachial fascia (mean 0.71 ± 0.20 mm); regarding the anterior region/levels, the antebrachial fascia was thicker (mean 0.70 ± 0.2 mm) than the brachial fascia (mean 0.61 ± 0.11 mm). In addition, the intra-rater reliability reported good reliability (ICC2,k: 0.88). US imaging helps to improve grading of fascial dysfunction or disease by revealing subclinical lesions, clinically invisible fascial changes, and one of the US parameters to reliably evaluate is the thickness in the different regions and levels.


2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 535-542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amilton Vieira ◽  
Angelina F. Siqueira ◽  
João B. Ferreira-Junior ◽  
Paulo Pereira ◽  
Dale Wagner ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 1584-1591 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathaniel D.M. Jenkins ◽  
Jessie M. Miller ◽  
Samuel L. Buckner ◽  
Kristen C. Cochrane ◽  
Haley C. Bergstrom ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Yung-Liang Wan ◽  
Dar-In Tai ◽  
Hsiang-Yang Ma ◽  
Bing-Hao Chiang ◽  
Chin-Kuo Chen ◽  
...  

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (5) ◽  
pp. 512
Author(s):  
Maryse Fortin ◽  
Brent Rosenstein ◽  
Jerome Levesque ◽  
Neil Nandlall

Background and Objectives: Ultrasound echo intensity (EI) of the lumbar multifidus muscle (LMM) could offer valuable insights regarding muscle quality in people with low back pain (LBP). However, whether the rater’s experience noticeably influences the reliability and precision of LMM EI measurements has not been established. The aims of this study were to investigate the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of LMM EI measurements, and to compare the reliability and SEM between a novice and an experienced rater. Materials and Methods: Twenty athletes (10 females, 10 males) with a history of LBP were included in this study. Transverse ultrasound images of LMM were taken at L5 in prone. LMM EI measurements were obtained bilaterally by tracing the maximum ROI representing the LMM cross-sectional area (CSA), avoiding the inclusion of bone or surrounding fascia. All measurements were performed by two novice raters and an experienced researcher. Each measurement was acquired by each rater three times for each side on three different images, and the average was used in the analyses. Raters were blinded to each other’s measurements and the participant’s clinical information. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) were obtained to assess the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. Results: The intra-rater ICC values for the LMM measurements for the experienced rater were excellent (ICC all > 0.997). The inter-rater reliability ICC values showed moderate to excellent reliability (0.614 to 0.994) and agreement between the novice raters and the experienced rater, except for Novice 1 for the right LMM, which revealed lower ICCs and a wider 95% CI. Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability results were similar when separately looking at the right and left side of the muscle and participant gender. Conclusions: Our findings support the clinical use of ultrasound imaging for the assessment of LMM EI in individuals with LBP.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document