Hamstring muscle architecture assessed sonographically using wide field of view: A reliability study

Abstract

Purpose To assess the intra-rater reliability of static wide field of view ultrasound to quantify the architectural characteristics of the hamstring muscles. Methods Twenty amateur male athletes were recruited. Their left hamstring muscles were assessed using static wide field of view ultrasound on two separate occasions. Static ultrasound images were acquired by a single sonographer using a 92mm linear transducer. The architectural characteristics (muscle length, fascicle length, pennation angle and muscle thickness) from two distinct locations of the bicep femoris long head and semimembranosus were evaluated. Muscle length and thickness of the bicep femoris short head and semitendinosus muscle were also evaluated. Intraclass correlation coefficient analyses were performed to determine the intra-rater reliability of the performed measurements. Results Both muscle (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.99; standard error of measurement = 4.3 to 6.6mm) and fascicle (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.92 to 0.98; standard error measurement = 1.1 to 2.4mm) length were measured with excellent intra-rater reliability. Muscle thickness was measured with excellent reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.9 to 0.96; standard error of measurement = 0.91mm to 1.4mm) for all hamstring muscles except for the proximal segments of the bicep femoris short head (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.85; standard error of measurement = 0.84mm) and semitendinosus (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.88; standard error of measurement = 0.82mm), which were measured with good reliability. Pennation angle was measured with good reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.77 to 0.87; standard error of measurement = 1 to 1.6°). Conclusion The architectural characteristics of the hamstring muscles of male amateur athletes can be reliably quantified using static wide field of view ultrasound.

The architectural characteristics of the hamstring muscles do not differ between male and female elite-level rugby union players

“…The between-group differences were 0.66 cm (zone A) and 0.57 cm (zone B), respectively; the male athletes had thicker muscles. In a previous study we described that the standard error of measurement (SEM) associated with the ultrasound technique for the quantification of muscle thickness of the bicep femoris short head muscle was 0.08 cm for zone A and zone B (Cronin et al, 2022). Therefore, we can be confident that our observed significant between-group difference in muscle thickness of the bicep femoris short head muscle (zone A and zone B) represents a true difference (as it exceed the SEM).…”

“…All sonograms were acquired by a single operator using a Hitachi Noblus ultrasound scanner (Hitachi Medical Systems, United Kingdom) with a 92 mm wide field of view transducer (Hitachi EUP-L53L). Trapezoid imaging was implemented at the beginning of each ultrasound scan to induce an image base wider than the footprint of the transducer; this permitted the inclusion of more lateral muscle architecture when measuring fascicles in the longitudinal plane up to 100 mm for a depth of 80 mm (Cronin et al, 2022).…”

“…A "mark" on the skin was used to indicate the position of the MTJs, with the distance between these two marks (in millimetres) being used to quantify muscle length. Each hamstring muscle was divided into two distinct zones; a proximal zone (zone A), and a distal zone (zone B) (Cronin et al, 2022). The proximal zone represents architecture adjacent to the proximal MTJ, whereas the distal zone represents architecture adjacent to the distal MTJ.…”

“…All sonograms were acquired from the left limb only. This sonographic acquisition technique is a technically reliable (Cronin et al, 2022) and precise method of quantifying hamstring muscle architecture (Cronin et al, 2021).…”

“…In these cases, fascicle length has been estimated (>50%) with various linear approximations, using the measured muscle thickness and pennation angle values (Timmins et al, 2016a;Bourne et al, 2017). Thus, the ability to quantify the architectural characteristics of the hamstring muscles is dependent upon the accuracy and repeatability of the measurement technique (Cronin et al, 2022). Recently, a semi-automated tracing software tool was develop to quantify the architectural characteristics of the hamstring muscles (Cronin et al, 2021).…”