The reliability and validity of ultrasound to quantify muscles in older adults: a systematic review

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

This review evaluates the reliability and validity of ultrasound to quantify muscles in older adults. The databases PubMed, Cochrane, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were systematically searched for studies. In 17 studies, the reliability (n = 13) and validity (n = 8) of ultrasound to quantify muscles in community-dwelling older adults (≥60 years) or a clinical population were evaluated. Four out of 13 reliability studies investigated both intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) scores for reliability ranged from -0.26 to 1.00. The highest ICC scores were found for the vastus lateralis, rectus femoris, upper arm anterior, and the trunk (ICC = 0.72 to 1.000). All included validity studies found ICC scores ranging from 0.92 to 0.999. Two studies describing the validity of ultrasound to predict lean body mass showed good validity as compared with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (r(2) = 0.92 to 0.96). This systematic review shows that ultrasound is a reliable and valid tool for the assessment of muscle size in older adults. More high-quality research is required to confirm these findings in both clinical and healthy populations. Furthermore, ultrasound assessment of small muscles needs further evaluation. Ultrasound to predict lean body mass is feasible; however, future research is required to validate prediction equations in older adults with varying function and health.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)702-712
JournalJournal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle
Volume8
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 12 Jul 2017

Keywords

  • older adults
  • muscle strength
  • ultrasound

Cite this

@article{8bb734c3a9b74a8b9448214cb30ffb49,
title = "The reliability and validity of ultrasound to quantify muscles in older adults: a systematic review",
abstract = "This review evaluates the reliability and validity of ultrasound to quantify muscles in older adults. The databases PubMed, Cochrane, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were systematically searched for studies. In 17 studies, the reliability (n = 13) and validity (n = 8) of ultrasound to quantify muscles in community-dwelling older adults (≥60 years) or a clinical population were evaluated. Four out of 13 reliability studies investigated both intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) scores for reliability ranged from -0.26 to 1.00. The highest ICC scores were found for the vastus lateralis, rectus femoris, upper arm anterior, and the trunk (ICC = 0.72 to 1.000). All included validity studies found ICC scores ranging from 0.92 to 0.999. Two studies describing the validity of ultrasound to predict lean body mass showed good validity as compared with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (r(2) = 0.92 to 0.96). This systematic review shows that ultrasound is a reliable and valid tool for the assessment of muscle size in older adults. More high-quality research is required to confirm these findings in both clinical and healthy populations. Furthermore, ultrasound assessment of small muscles needs further evaluation. Ultrasound to predict lean body mass is feasible; however, future research is required to validate prediction equations in older adults with varying function and health.",
keywords = "older adults, muscle strength, ultrasound, ouderen, spierstelsel, ultrageluid",
author = "Willemke Nijholt and Aldo Scafoglieri and Harri{\"e}t Jager-Wittenaar and Hans Hobbelen and {van der Schans}, {Cees P}",
note = "{\circledC} 2017 The Authors. Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the Society on Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders.",
year = "2017",
month = "7",
day = "12",
doi = "10.1002/jcsm.12210",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "702--712",
journal = "Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle",
issn = "2190-5991",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "5",

}

The reliability and validity of ultrasound to quantify muscles in older adults : a systematic review. / Nijholt, Willemke; Scafoglieri, Aldo; Jager-Wittenaar, Harriët; Hobbelen, Hans; van der Schans, Cees P.

In: Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, Vol. 8, No. 5, 12.07.2017, p. 702-712.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The reliability and validity of ultrasound to quantify muscles in older adults

T2 - a systematic review

AU - Nijholt, Willemke

AU - Scafoglieri, Aldo

AU - Jager-Wittenaar, Harriët

AU - Hobbelen, Hans

AU - van der Schans, Cees P

N1 - © 2017 The Authors. Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the Society on Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders.

PY - 2017/7/12

Y1 - 2017/7/12

N2 - This review evaluates the reliability and validity of ultrasound to quantify muscles in older adults. The databases PubMed, Cochrane, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were systematically searched for studies. In 17 studies, the reliability (n = 13) and validity (n = 8) of ultrasound to quantify muscles in community-dwelling older adults (≥60 years) or a clinical population were evaluated. Four out of 13 reliability studies investigated both intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) scores for reliability ranged from -0.26 to 1.00. The highest ICC scores were found for the vastus lateralis, rectus femoris, upper arm anterior, and the trunk (ICC = 0.72 to 1.000). All included validity studies found ICC scores ranging from 0.92 to 0.999. Two studies describing the validity of ultrasound to predict lean body mass showed good validity as compared with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (r(2) = 0.92 to 0.96). This systematic review shows that ultrasound is a reliable and valid tool for the assessment of muscle size in older adults. More high-quality research is required to confirm these findings in both clinical and healthy populations. Furthermore, ultrasound assessment of small muscles needs further evaluation. Ultrasound to predict lean body mass is feasible; however, future research is required to validate prediction equations in older adults with varying function and health.

AB - This review evaluates the reliability and validity of ultrasound to quantify muscles in older adults. The databases PubMed, Cochrane, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were systematically searched for studies. In 17 studies, the reliability (n = 13) and validity (n = 8) of ultrasound to quantify muscles in community-dwelling older adults (≥60 years) or a clinical population were evaluated. Four out of 13 reliability studies investigated both intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) scores for reliability ranged from -0.26 to 1.00. The highest ICC scores were found for the vastus lateralis, rectus femoris, upper arm anterior, and the trunk (ICC = 0.72 to 1.000). All included validity studies found ICC scores ranging from 0.92 to 0.999. Two studies describing the validity of ultrasound to predict lean body mass showed good validity as compared with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (r(2) = 0.92 to 0.96). This systematic review shows that ultrasound is a reliable and valid tool for the assessment of muscle size in older adults. More high-quality research is required to confirm these findings in both clinical and healthy populations. Furthermore, ultrasound assessment of small muscles needs further evaluation. Ultrasound to predict lean body mass is feasible; however, future research is required to validate prediction equations in older adults with varying function and health.

KW - older adults

KW - muscle strength

KW - ultrasound

KW - ouderen

KW - spierstelsel

KW - ultrageluid

UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/reliability-validity-ultrasound-quantify-muscles-older-adults-systematic-review

U2 - 10.1002/jcsm.12210

DO - 10.1002/jcsm.12210

M3 - Review article

VL - 8

SP - 702

EP - 712

JO - Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle

JF - Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle

SN - 2190-5991

IS - 5

ER -