About
Scope & Aims
Editorial office
Editorial board
Ethical standards and procedures
Abstracting and indexing
Contact
Articles & Issues
Current issue
Articles in press
Archive
For Authors
General rules
Ethics in publishing
Guide for authors
Templates
Publication charge
For Reviewers
Our reviewers
Ethics in publishing
Guide for reviewers
Books and Events
Books
Events
ORIGINAL PAPER
Validity and reliability of the Egyptian algometer in patients with bruxism
1
Department of Basic Science, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
2
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
3
Department of Biomechanics, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
Submission date: 2020-04-17
Acceptance date: 2020-07-14
Publication date: 2022-03-29
Physiother Quart. 2022;30(1):24-26
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Pressure pain threshold has been quantified by using a gold standard algometer in patients with bruxism. However, the expense associated with quantifying pressure pain threshold to detect trigger points with a gold standard algometer precludes its use in the clinic. This study aimed to measure the reliability and validity of the more accessible Egyptian algometer for pressure pain threshold evaluation in patients with bruxism.
Methods:
A descriptive repeated-measures study was performed among 100 participants with bruxism. Pressure pain threshold values were collected from the left temporalis, right temporalis, left masseter, and right masseter muscles with the participants sitting. Pressure pain thresholds were assessed over 2 sessions separated by a 1-week interval.
Results:
Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) determined the intra-rater reliability and Pearson correlation analysis determined the validity of the Egyptian algometer. ICC equalled 0.878, 0.785, 0.896, and 0.903 for the right masseter, left masseter, right temporalis, and left temporalis muscles, respectively. The standard error of measurement ranged from 0.24 to 0.5, the minimal detectable difference ranged from 0.66 to 1.41, ICC ranged from 0.785 to 0.903. Pearson correlation values were 0.673, 0.670, 0.408, and 0.705 for the right masseter, left masseter, right temporalis, and left temporalis muscles, respectively.
Conclusions:
High ICCs indicated a strong agreement between the measurement systems, suggesting that the Egyptian algometer is a reliable and valid device for quantification of pressure pain threshold in patients with bruxism.
Pressure pain threshold has been quantified by using a gold standard algometer in patients with bruxism. However, the expense associated with quantifying pressure pain threshold to detect trigger points with a gold standard algometer precludes its use in the clinic. This study aimed to measure the reliability and validity of the more accessible Egyptian algometer for pressure pain threshold evaluation in patients with bruxism.
Methods:
A descriptive repeated-measures study was performed among 100 participants with bruxism. Pressure pain threshold values were collected from the left temporalis, right temporalis, left masseter, and right masseter muscles with the participants sitting. Pressure pain thresholds were assessed over 2 sessions separated by a 1-week interval.
Results:
Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) determined the intra-rater reliability and Pearson correlation analysis determined the validity of the Egyptian algometer. ICC equalled 0.878, 0.785, 0.896, and 0.903 for the right masseter, left masseter, right temporalis, and left temporalis muscles, respectively. The standard error of measurement ranged from 0.24 to 0.5, the minimal detectable difference ranged from 0.66 to 1.41, ICC ranged from 0.785 to 0.903. Pearson correlation values were 0.673, 0.670, 0.408, and 0.705 for the right masseter, left masseter, right temporalis, and left temporalis muscles, respectively.
Conclusions:
High ICCs indicated a strong agreement between the measurement systems, suggesting that the Egyptian algometer is a reliable and valid device for quantification of pressure pain threshold in patients with bruxism.
REFERENCES (19)
1.
Wilmont P, Saczuk K, Pawlak Ł, Łukomska-Szymańska M. The most commonly used methods of treatment for bruxism – a literature review. J Stoma. 2018;71(4):350–355; doi: 10.5114/jos.2018.83409.
2.
Chung S-C, Um B-Y, Kim H-S. Evaluation of pressure pain threshold in head and neck muscles by electronic algometer: intrarater and interrater reliability. Cranio. 1992;10(1):28–34; doi: 10.1080/08869634.1992.11677888.
3.
Fischer AA. Documentation of myofascial trigger points. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1988;69(4):286–291.
4.
Fischer AA. Application of pressure algometry in manual medicine. J Man Med. 1990;5:145–150.
5.
Ohrbach R, Gale EN. Pressure pain thresholds, clinical assessment, and differential diagnosis: reliability and validity in patients with myogenic pain. Pain. 1989;39(2):157–169; doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(89)90003-1.
6.
Kosek E, Ekholm J, Nordemar R. A comparison of pressure pain thresholds in different tissues and body regions. Long-term reliability of pressure algometry in healthy volunteers. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1993;25(3):117–124.
7.
Fischer AA. Pressure algometry over normal muscles. Standard values, validity and reproducibility of pressure threshold. Pain. 1987;30(1):115–126; doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(87)90089-3.
8.
Ylinen J, Nykänen M, Kautiainen H, Häkkinen A. Evaluation of repeatability of pressure algometry on the neck muscles for clinical use. Man Ther. 2007;12(2):192–197; doi: 10.1016/j.math.2006.06.010.
9.
Jensen K, Andersen HØ, Olesen J, Lindblom U. Pressure-pain threshold in human temporal region. Evaluation of a new pressure algometer. Pain. 1986;25(3):313–323; doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(86)90235-6.
10.
Merskey H, Gillis A, Marszalek KS. A clinical investigation of reactions to pain. J Ment Sci. 1962;108(454):347–355; doi: 10.1192/bjp.108.454.347.
11.
Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson; 2009.
12.
Weir JP. Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19(1):231–240; doi: 10.1519/15184.1.
13.
Merskey H, Spear FG. The reliability of the pressure algometer. Br J Soc Clin Psychol. 1964;3(2):130–136; doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8260.1964.tb00415.x.
14.
Reeves JL, Jaeger B, Graff-Radford SB. Reliability of the pressure algometer as a measure of myofascial trigger point sensitivity. Pain. 1986;24(3):313–321; doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(86)90117-X.
15.
List T, Helkimo M, Falk G. Reliability and validity of a pressure threshold meter in recording tenderness in the masseter muscle and the anterior temporalis muscle. Cranio. 1989;7(3):223–229; doi: 10.1080/08869634.1989.11678288.
16.
Stockstill JW, Gross AJ, McCall WD Jr. Interrater reliability in masticatory muscle palpation. J Craniomandib Disord. 1989;3(3):143–146.
17.
Jensen K. Quantification of tenderness by palpation and use of pressure algometers. In: Fricton JR, Awad E (eds.), Advances in pain research and therapy, vol 17. New York: Raven Press; 1990; 165–181.
18.
Tunks E, Crook J, Norman G, Kalaher S. Tender points in fibromyalgia. Pain. 1988;34(1):11–19; doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(88)90176-5.
19.
Murphy GJ, McKinney MW, Gross WG. Temporomandibular-related pressure thresholds: a model for establishing baselines. Cranio. 1992;10(2):118–123; doi: 10.1080/08869634.1992.11677899.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 2544-4395 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
