Arruda et al.2626 Arruda BR, Soares ALC, Carvalho RF, Gomes PSC. Reliability and measurement error of the proximal, medial and distal portions of the vastus lateralis muscle thickness measured with extended field of view ultrasonography. Kinesiol 2022;54(1):107-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.26582/k.54.1.11. http://dx.doi.org/10.26582/k.54.1.11...
|
25M |
24±4 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra- & inter-rater |
VL |
Intra: ICC = 0.991-0.998; TEM = 0.01-0.03 cm; CV = 0.5-1.8% |
Inter: ICC = 0.990-0.996; TEM = 0.02-0.03 cm; CV = 0.6-2.3% |
Barotsis et al.2222 Barotsis N, Tsiganos P, Kokkalis Z, Panayiotakis G, Panagiotopoulos E. Reliability of muscle thickness measurements in ultrasonography. Int J Rehabil Res 2020;43(2):123-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000390. PMid:31913183. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000...
|
8M & 5W |
24±3 |
Reliability |
Intra-rater |
RF |
ICC = 0.621-0.976 |
VI |
ICC = 0.411-0.938 |
Betz et al.1818 Betz TM, Wehrstein M, Preisner F, Bendszus M, Friedmann-Bette B. Reliability and validity of a standardized ultrasound examination protocol to quantify vastus lateralis muscle. J Rehabil Med 2021;53(7):jrm00212. http://dx.doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2854. PMid:34121129. http://dx.doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2854...
|
7M & 9W |
33±11 |
Validity & Reliability |
MRI, intra- & inter-rater |
VL |
Validity: ICC = 0.835-0.895 |
47±11 |
Intra: ICC = 0.928-0.961 |
|
Inter: ICC = 0.936-0.965 |
Caresio et al.2323 Caresio C, Salvi M, Molinari F, Meiburger KM, Minetto MA. Fully automated muscle ultrasound analysis (MUSA): robust and accurate muscle thickness measurement. Ultrasound Med Biol 2017;43(1):195-205. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2016.08.032. PMid:27720522. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio...
|
25M & 25W |
31±11 |
Reliability |
Inter-rater |
RF |
ICC = 0.98 |
VL |
ICC = 0.99 |
Carr et al.2727 Carr JC, Gerstner GR, Voskuil CC, Harden JE, Dunnick D, Badillo KM, et al. The influence of sonographer experience on skeletal muscle image acquisition and analysis. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol 2021;6(4):91. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfmk6040091. PMid:34842750. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfmk6040091...
|
7M & 10W |
24±3 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Inter-rater |
VL |
ICC = 0.826-0.854; SEM = 0.19 cm; SEM% = 7.7-7.8% |
21±2 |
Chiaramonte et al.2424 Chiaramonte R, Bonfiglio M, Castorina EG, Antoci SAM. The primacy of ultrasound in the assessment of muscle architecture: precision, accuracy, reliability of ultrasonography. Physiatrist, radiologist, general internist, and family practitioner’s experiences. Rev Assoc Med Bras 2019;65(2):165-70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.65.2.165. PMid:30892439. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.65.2...
|
21M |
26-38 |
Reliability |
Intra- & inter-rater |
VL |
Intra: ICC = 0.92 |
Inter: ICC = 0.97 |
Cleary et al.2828 Cleary CJ, Nabavizadeh O, Young KL, Herda AA. Skeletal muscle analysis of panoramic ultrasound is reliable across multiple raters. PLoS One 2022;17(5):e0267641. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267641. PMid:35500010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0...
|
15 NI |
18-35 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra- & inter-rater |
RF |
Intra: SEM = 0.03-0.07 cm; SEM% = 1.2-2.8% |
|
Inter: ICC = 0.984; SEM = 0.06 cm |
VL |
Intra: SEM = 0.04-0.08 cm; SEM% = 1.6-3.3% |
|
Inter: ICC = 0.993; SEM = 0.05 cm |
Dudley-Javoroski et al.2929 Dudley-Javoroski S, McMullen T, Borgwardt MR, Peranich LM, Shields RK. Reliability and responsiveness of musculoskeletal ultrasound in subjects with and without spinal cord injury. Ultrasound Med Biol 2010;36(10):1594-607. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2010.07.019. PMid:20800961. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio...
|
8M & 8W |
26±5 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra- & inter-rater |
VL |
Intra: ICC = 0.66-0.99; CV = 0.8-6.4% |
Inter: ICC = 0.742 |
Ema et al.3030 Ema R, Wakahara T, Mogi Y, Miyamoto N, Komatsu T, Kanehisa H, et al. In vivo measurement of human rectus femoris architecture by ultrasonography: validity and applicability. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 2013;33(4):267-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cpf.12023. PMid:23692615. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cpf.12023...
|
7M & 7W |
24±1 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra-rater |
RF |
ICC = 0.981-0.984; CV = 2.3-2.4% |
Franchi et al.3131 Franchi MV, Longo S, Mallinson J, Quinlan JI, Taylor T, Greenhaff PL, et al. Muscle thickness correlates to muscle cross-sectional area in the assessment of strength training-induced hypertrophy. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2018;28(3):846-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/sms.12961. PMid:28805932. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/sms.12961...
|
9M |
24±2 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra-rater |
VL |
ICC = 0.99; SEM% = 1.7% |
Gomes et al.3232 Gomes PSC, Meirelles CM, Leite SP, Montenegro CAB. Confiabilidade da medida de espessuras musculares pela ultrassonografia. Rev Bras Med Esporte 2010;16(1):41-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1517-86922010000100008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1517-86922010...
|
7M & 8W |
34±11 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra-rater |
RF |
ICC = 0.929; CV = 4.6% |
Hagoort et al.3333 Hagoort I, Hortobágyi T, Vuillerme N, Lamoth CJC, Murgia A. Age- and muscle-specific reliability of muscle architecture measurements assessed by two-dimensional panoramic ultrasound. Biomed Eng Online 2022;21(1):15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-021-00967-4. PMid:35152889. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-021-009...
|
7M & 5W |
23±4 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra- & inter-rater |
VL |
Intra: ICC = 0.93-0.98; SEM = 0.05-0.11 cm |
Inter: ICC = 0.98; SEM = 0.10 cm |
Ishida et al.3434 Ishida H, Suehiro T, Suzuki K, Watanabe S. Muscle thickness and echo intensity measurements of the rectus femoris muscle of healthy subjects: intra and interrater reliability of transducer tilt during ultrasound. J Bodyw Mov Ther 2018;22(3):657-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2017.12.005. PMid:30100293. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2017.12...
|
14M |
21±1 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra- & inter-rater |
RF |
Intra: ICC = 0.99; SEM = 0.04 cm |
Inter: ICC = 0.96; SEM = 0.07 cm |
Jacob et al.3535 Jacob I, Jones G, Francis P, Johnson MI. The effect of limb position on measured values of vastus lateralis muscle morphology using B Mode ultrasound. Transl Sports Med 2021;4(6):697-705. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tsm2.271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tsm2.271...
|
32M |
18±1 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra-rater |
VL |
ICC = 0.95; SEM = 0.04 cm |
Lanferdini et al.3636 Lanferdini FJ, Sonda FC, Paz IA, Oliveira LZ, Wagner ES No, Molinari T, et al. Reliability of knee extensor neuromuscular structure and function and functional tests’ performance. J Bodyw Mov Ther 2021;27:584-90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2021.05.004. PMid:34391291. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2021.05...
|
11M & 11W |
27±5 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra- & inter-rater |
RF |
Intra: ICC = 0.848; SEM = 0.11 cm; CV = 14.8% |
|
Inter: ICC = 0.803; SEM = 0.15 cm; CV = 17.9% |
VL |
Intra: ICC = 0.987; SEM = 0.04 cm; CV = 14.7% |
|
Inter: ICC = 0.882; SEM = 0.09 cm; CV = 13.1% |
Lima and Oliveira3737 Lima KMM, Oliveira LF. Confiabilidade das medidas de arquitetura do músculo vasto lateral pela ultrassonografia. Mot Rev Educ Fis 2013;19(1):217-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1980-65742013000100022. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1980-65742013...
|
4M & 10W |
22±2 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra-rater |
VL |
ICC = 0.95-0.99; TEM = 0.10-0.11 cm; CV = 3.1-3.8% |
Mairet et al.3838 Mairet S, Maïsetti O, Portero P. Homogeneity and reproducibility of in vivo fascicle length and pennation determined by ultrasonography in human vastus lateralis muscle. Sci Sports 2006;21(5):268-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2006.08.004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2006....
|
10M & 9W |
30±6 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra-rater |
VL |
ICC = 0.65-0.75; SEM = 0.15-0.18; SEM% = 6.7-7.9% |
Mechelli et al.1919 Mechelli F, Arendt-Nielsen L, Stokes M, Agyapong-Badu S. Validity of ultrasound imaging versus magnetic resonance imaging for measuring anterior thigh muscle, subcutaneous fat, and fascia thickness. Methods Protoc 2019;2(3):58. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/mps2030058. PMid:31295936. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/mps2030058...
|
10M & 10W |
49±10 |
Validity |
MRI |
RF + VI |
ICC = 0.99; SEM = 0.07 cm |
Mechelli et al.3939 Mechelli F, Arendt-Nielsen L, Stokes M, Agyapong-Badu S. Inter-rater and intra-rater reliability of ultrasound imaging for measuring quadriceps muscle and non-contractile tissue thickness of the anterior thigh. Biomed Phys Eng Express. 2019;5(3):037002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/2057-1976/ab102f. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/2057-1976/ab10...
|
12M & 12W |
49±10 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra- & inter-rater |
RF + VI |
Intra: ICC = 0.96; SEM = 0.13 cm |
Inter: ICC = 0.98; SEM = 0.10 cm |
Nijholt et al.2020 Nijholt W, Jager-Wittenaar H, Raj IS, van der Schans CP, Hobbelen H. Reliability and validity of ultrasound to estimate muscles: a comparison between different transducers and parameters. Clin Nutr ESPEN 2020;35:146-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clnesp.2019.10.009. PMid:31987109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clnesp.2019....
|
5M & 9W |
33±NI |
Validity & Reliability |
MRI & intra-rater |
RF |
Validity: ICC = 0.60 |
Reliability: ICC = 0.87 |
Oranchuck et al.4040 Oranchuk DJ, Nelson AR, Storey AG, Cronin JB. Variability of regional quadriceps architecture in trained men assessed by B-mode and extended-field-of-view ultrasonography. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2020;15(3):430-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2019-0050. PMid:31188706. http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2019-005...
|
26M |
29±5 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra-rater |
RF |
ICC = 0.93-0.95; TEM = 0.23-0.47 cm; CV = 2.7-4.1% |
VL |
ICC = 0.94-0.98; TEM = 0.15-0.26 cm; CV = 2.4-3.8% |
VI |
ICC = 0.88-0.98; TEM = 0.14-0.37 cm; CV = 2.8-9.3% |
Ruas et al.4141 Ruas CV, Pinto RS, Lima CD, Costa PB, Brown LE. Test-retest reliability of muscle thickness, echo-intensity and cross sectional area of quadriceps and hamstrings muscle groups using B-mode ultrasound. Int J Kinesiol Sports Sci 2017;5(1):35-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijkss.v.5n.1p.35. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijkss.v.5...
|
10M |
23±2 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra-rater |
RF |
ICC = 0.97; SEM = 0.07 cm |
VL |
ICC = 0.97; SEM = 0.10 cm |
VM |
ICC = 0.97; SEM = 0.14 cm |
VI |
ICC = 0.99; SEM = 0.07 cm |
Santos and Armada-da-Silva4242 Santos R, Armada-da-Silva PAS. Reproducibility of ultrasound-derived muscle thickness and echo-intensity for the entire quadriceps femoris muscle. Radiography 2017;23(3):E51-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2017.03.011. PMid:28687301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2017.03...
|
10M & 10W |
20±2 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra-rater |
RF |
ICC = 0.88-0.99; SEM = 0.09-0.14 cm |
VL |
ICC = 0.70-0.99; SEM = 0.09-0.15 cm |
VM |
ICC = 0.80-0.98; SEM = 0.07-0.16 cm |
VI |
ICC = 0.74-0.99; SEM = 0.13-0.19 cm |
Soares et al.4343 Soares ALC, Nogueira FS, Gomes PSC. Assessment methods of vastus lateralis muscle architecture using panoramic ultrasound: a new approach, test-retest reliability and measurement error. Braz J Kinanthrop Hum Perform 2021;23:e76402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1980-0037.2021v23e76402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1980-0037.2021...
|
12M |
24±6 |
Reliability & measurement error |
Intra-rater |
VL |
ICC = 0.964; TEM = 0.07 cm; CV = 2.9% |
Takahashi et al.2525 Takahashi Y, Fujino Y, Miura K, Toida A, Matsuda T, Makita S. Intra- and inter-rater reliability of rectus femoris muscle thickness measured using ultrasonography in healthy individuals. Ultrasound J 2021;13(1):21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-021-00224-8. PMid:33856566. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-021-002...
|
12M |
27±4 |
Reliability |
Intra- & inter-rater |
RF |
Intra: ICC = 0.95 |
Inter: ICC = 0.70 |
Worsley et al.2121 Worsley PR, Kitsell F, Samuel D, Stokes M. Validity of measuring distal vastus medialis muscle using rehabilitative ultrasound imaging versus magnetic resonance imaging. Man Ther 2014;19(3):259-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2014.02.002. PMid:24582328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2014.02...
|
12M |
18-30 |
Validity & Reliability |
MRI & intra-rater |
VM |
Validity: ICC = 0.84-0.94 |
Reliability: ICC = 0.90-0.98 |