RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pain-free bite force (PFBF) is a promising measure to evaluate bite function in temporomandibular disorders (TMDs), yet the reliability of the measure is unknown. OBJECTIVES: Establish the (1) within-session test-retest reliability of PFBF in a healthy population for a single and mean of three trials in supported and unsupported sitting; (2) standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC). METHODS: Thirty healthy participants (n = 15 female, mean [SD] age = 34.4 [11.0] years) completed two sessions (30-60 min apart) comprising three PFBF trials on each side, in both supported and unsupported sitting, to provide data for 60 (30 participants × two sides) test-retest assessments. Test-retest reliability for the first trial and mean of three trials in each position were determined using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), before calculating the corresponding SEM and MDC for males (M) and females (F) respectively. RESULTS: Within-session reliability was considered excellent for a single trial in supported sitting (ICC = 0.85; SEM M/F = 99/84 N; MDC M/F = 275/232 N) and unsupported sitting (ICC = 0.91; SEM M/F = 72/59 N, MDC M/F = 200/163 N), and for a mean of three trials in supported sitting (ICC = 0.89; SEM M/F = 66/79 N, MDC M/F = 182/220 N) and unsupported sitting (ICC = 0.92; SEM M/F = 64/59 N, MDC M/F = 177/164 N). CONCLUSION: Single and a mean of three trials in supported and unsupported sitting appear reliable methods to measure PFBF in a healthy population. Testing PFBF using a mean of three trials in unsupported sitting appears superior over other methods though due to higher test-retest reliability, and lower SEM and MDC. Future studies should examine the reliability of PFBF in TMD populations.
Asunto(s)
Fuerza de la Mordida , Voluntarios Sanos , Sedestación , Humanos , Femenino , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Masculino , Adulto , Trastornos de la Articulación Temporomandibular/fisiopatología , Adulto Joven , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
Continuous seated postures may increase the risk of adverse health outcomes such as low-back pain, and this risk may be influenced by several modifying factors. In the present study, we aimed to quantify the effects of continuous sitting and psychosocial stress under an unsupported sitting condition. Fourteen participants completed continuous, 40 min. periods of computer-based tasks, involving both low and higher levels of psychosocial stress, while using a laptop computer without a desk. Continuous sitting significantly increased perceived discomfort (particularly in the upper and lower back), trunk flexion and metrics of localized muscle fatigue. A higher level of psychosocial stress increased estimated lumbosacral compression forces (by â¼12%). Only weak correlations were found between subjective and objective measures, while various fatigue metrics showed a good level of correspondence with each other. These results could support the future evaluation or design of diverse seated work configurations. Practitioner Summary: Continuous, 40 min. periods of unsupported sitting had broad impacts on subjective and objective outcomes, including discomfort, postures, spine loads and localized muscle fatigue, while psychosocial stress only had a substantial influence on lumbosacral compression. These results extend our understanding of sitting behaviors and provide information for designing future sitting environments.
Asunto(s)
Músculos de la Espalda/fisiopatología , Dolor de la Región Lumbar/fisiopatología , Fatiga Muscular , Sedestación , Estrés Psicológico/fisiopatología , Adulto , Fenómenos Biomecánicos , Ergonomía , Femenino , Humanos , Cinética , Vértebras Lumbares , Región Lumbosacra , Masculino , Rango del Movimiento Articular , Soporte de Peso , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Background: Evidence of intervention effectiveness depends on, among other things, the use of a common set of valid and reliable measures that are responsive to change and reflect clinically important outcomes. Objective: To identify clinical assessment instruments with properties for measuring unsupported sitting balance in subjects with spinal cord injury (SCI). Methods: Bibliographic databases (PubMed, Science Direct, CINAHL, and Central) were searched for articles with the key words "spinal cord injury," "unsupported sitting," and "outcome assessment" in combination with a specific methodological search filter for each database. Studies describing the application of any assessment instrument for measuring unsupported sitting balance in subjects with SCI, which had the evaluation of any measurement property, were included in the review. Publication details, measure's name, setting, summary statistics, measurement properties (reliability, validity, responsiveness), and statistical significance (p values) were extracted. Results: Eight hundred forty publications were identified; 8 articles were included in the systematic review. Twelve instruments were identified and analyzed, showing limited and incomplete measurement properties. Among them, 10 addressed activity, 1 addressed structures/body functions, and 1 addressed both activity and structures/body functions domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Conclusion: Based mainly on the measurement properties and the development of the instruments analyzed in this review, the Sitting Balance Measure, the Trunk Control Test, and the Set of Assessment Tools for Measuring Unsupported Sitting seem to be the most appropriate and recommended measures to assess unsupported sitting in subjects with SCI.