The Digital Caliper's Interrater Reliability in Measuring the Interrecti Distance and Its Accuracy in Diagnosing the Diastasis of Rectus Abdominis Muscle in the Third Trimester of Pregnancy

The Application of 3D Imaging as an Appropriate Method of Wildlife Craniometry: Evaluation of Accuracy and Measurement Efficiency

“…Measurements of 2D dimensions, such as of length or width, have proven very useful and have become common in human or veterinary cardiology and angiography (e.g., in measuring stenoses of important arteries for use in therapy) [ 33 ], as well as in dentistry and implantology [ 57 ]. Even today, many craniometric studies use a digital caliper with an accuracy ranging from 0.01 to 0.5 mm as the primary measuring method [ 41 , 47 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 ]. In the case of a 3D scanner, when reconstructing the roe deer antlers [ 63 ], rotator cuff [ 64 ], and vertebrae [ 65 ], the accuracy ranges from 0.01 to 0.1 mm; for human skulls [ 66 ], the tissue equivalent phantom [ 67 ] and elbow joint [ 68 ], is 0.33–1.2 mm in a CT scanner.…”

Technical aspects of inter-recti distance measurement with ultrasonographic imaging for physiotherapy purposes: the scoping review

“…Eight studies were from Canada [8,17,20,33,48,[53][54][55] and nine from Spain [11,[42][43][44][45][56][57][58][59]. Countries with two studies were Brazil [60,61], the USA [9,62], the UK [16,63], Norway [13,37], New Zealand [47,64], and China [65,66]. Countries with one study were Israel [27], Australia [67], Japan [50], Italy [10], Sweden [68], Taiwan [18], Portugal [36], Korea [69], and Poland [70].…”

“…Of the 49 publications, 36 (73.5%) concerned women in their perinatal periods: In 31, the assessment was scheduled after pregnancy/pregnancies in [8, 10, 12, 13, 16-18, 20, 27, 33, 34, 36, 37, 48, 49, 53-56, 60, 63-71, 73, 74], in four during and after pregnancy [15,35,72,75], and in one during pregnancy (2.8%) [61]; 17 publications concerned women with increased IRD/DRA [8,10,13,15,17,20,27,33,34,37,48,53,64,65,68,69,75]. In 13 of the 49 studies (26.5%), the study populations comprised of men and/or women (nulliparas and/or paras): Three were validity/reliability studies [47,50,62], three investigated the impact of specific tasks on IRD [9,11,58], five assessed the IRD in medical conditions not related to pregnancy [44-46, 57, 59], and two investigated the IRD in athletes [42,43] (Table 2).…”

“…In all 49 studies, the IRD was measured in the supine position: in 26 (53.1%), at rest and during muscle activity/ task [8, 9, 11, 13, 27, 34-37, 47-49, 53, 55-60, 62, 64, 67, 70, 71, 73, 74], in 21 (42.9%), only at rest [10, 12, 15-18, 20, 33, 42-46, 50, 54, 65, 66, 68, 69, 72, 75], in one (2%), only during muscle activity/task [61], and in one (2%), in supine (at rest), and in sitting and standing [63]. One of the studies also performed measurements in side plank position [64].…”

“…Of the 27 studies that examined IRD during specific muscle activity/task in supine, some used more than one task. The tasks were head lift [8,13,48,53,55], trunk flexion with scapulae raised fully or partially off the coach (referred to as trunk flexion [60,61], partial curl-up [9,47,62], semi curl-up [8,74], curl-up [13,27,34,56,64,70], abdominal crunch [11,35,36,49,71,73], modified abdominal sit-up [67], and abdominal contraction [56]), transversus abdominis contraction/abdominal drawing-in maneuver (ADIM) [13,35,37,49,56,58,73,74], curl-up/abdominal crunch with preactivated transversus abdominis (by ADIM [11,73,74] or pelvic floor muscles (PFM) contraction [34]), exclusive PFM contraction [13,37], combined PFM contraction and curl-up [13], combined PFM contraction and ADIM [13,37,64]…”