Instrumental validity and intra/inter-rater reliability of a novel low-cost digital pressure algometer

Abstract

Background Pain assessment is a key measure that accompanies treatments in a wide range of clinical settings. A low-cost valid and reliable pressure algometer would allow objective assessment of pressure pain to assist a variety of health professionals. However, the pressure algometer is often expensive, which limits its daily use in both clinical and research settings. Objectives This study aimed to assess the instrumental validity, and the intra- and inter-rater reliability of an inexpensive digital adapted pressure algometer. Methods A single rater applied 60 random compressions on a force platform. The pressure pain thresholds of 20 volunteers were collected twice (3 days apart) by two raters. The main outcome measurements were as follows: the maximal peak force (in kPa) and the pressure pain threshold (adapted pressure algometer vs. force platform). Cronbach’s α test was used to assess internal consistency. The standard error of measurement provided estimates of measurement error, and the measurement bias was estimated with the Bland–Altman method, with lower and upper limits of agreement. Results No differences were observed when comparing the compression results (P = 0.51). The validity and internal intra-rater consistencies ranged from 0.84 to 0.99, and the standard error of measurement from 0.005 to 0.04 kPa. Very strong (r = 0.73–0.74) to near-perfect (r = 0.99) correlations were found, with a low risk of bias for all measurements. The results demonstrated the validity and intra-rater reliability of the digitally adapted pressure algometer. Inter-rater reliability results were moderate (r = 0.55–0.60; Cronbach’s α = 0.71–0.75). Conclusion The adapted pressure algometer provide valid and reliable measurements of pressure pain threshold. The results support more widespread use of the pressure pain threshold method among clinicians.

Inter-rater and intra-rater reliability of isotonic exercise monitoring device for measuring active knee extension

“…For the sample size calculation, we used the ICC based on two raters (k = 2) ( Jerez-Mayorga et al, 2020 ), and the expected effect size to assume differences in EMG and ROM measurement in an isotonic exercise monitoring device compared with standard protocols was computed ( Koo & Li, 2016 ). We estimated the power (1 − ) by defining the expected reliability (ICC, ) as 0.6, the significance level ( ) as 0.05, and a power of 0.90 ( Bujang & Baharum, 2017 ).…”

Masticatory Myoelectric Side Modular Ratio Asymmetry during Maximal Biting in Women with and without Temporomandibular Disorders

“…The RDC/TMD is internationally recognized as the gold standard for TMD diagnosis [ 16 ]. The assessment included external palpation, using a calibrated pressure algometer (MED.DOR pressure algometry, Governador Valadares, Brazil) [ 17 ]. Internal to the mouth, the index finger was calibrated using the pressure algometer to palpate the medial pterygoideus muscles.…”

Objective methods of diagnosing myofascial pain syndrome

“…Następnie urządzenie poprzez cyfrowy lub mechaniczny wskaźnik wyświetla siłę nacisku. Badanie charakteryzuje się łatwością wykonania, co sprawia, że jest skutecznym narzędziem do obiektywnej oceny ilościowej bólu, umożliwiając terapeutom monitorowanie efektów leczenia [39] oraz poprawę skuteczności w rozpoznawaniu przewlekłego MPS [40]. Niemniej jednak w badaniu Parka i wsp., pomimo wykazania wysokiej rzetelności badania algometrem, stwierdzono, że PPT może być użytecznym parametrem do oceny efektu leczenia, ale nieprzydatnym w diagnostyce MPS ani nawet jako metoda przesiewowa [41].…”