Reliability and Responsiveness of a Novel Device to Evaluate Tongue Force.
feedback
muscle strength
neurofeedback
rehabilitation
reproducibility of results tongue
Journal
Life (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 2075-1729
Titre abrégé: Life (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101580444
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 May 2023
16 May 2023
Historique:
received:
13
03
2023
revised:
21
04
2023
accepted:
11
05
2023
medline:
27
5
2023
pubmed:
27
5
2023
entrez:
27
5
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Measurements of tongue force are important in clinical practice during both the diagnostic process and rehabilitation progress. It has been shown that patients with chronic temporomandibular disorders have less tongue strength than asymptomatic subjects. Currently, there are few devices to measure tongue force on the market, with different limitations. That is why a new device has been developed to overcome them. The objectives of the study were to determine the intra- and inter-rater reliability and the responsiveness of a new low-cost device to evaluate tongue force in an asymptomatic population. Two examiners assessed the maximal tongue force in 26 asymptomatic subjects using a developed prototype of an Arduino device. Each examiner performed a total of eight measurements of tongue force in each subject. Each tongue direction was measured twice (elevation, depression, right lateralization, and left lateralization) in order to test the intrarater reliability. The intrarater reliability using the new device was excellent for the measurements of the tongue force for up (ICC > 0.94), down (ICC > 0.93) and right (ICC > 0.92) movements, and good for the left movement (ICC > 0.82). The SEM and MDC values were below 0.98 and 2.30, respectively, for the intrarater reliability analysis. Regarding the inter-rater reliability, the ICC was excellent for measuring the tongue up movements (ICC = 0.94), and good for all the others (down ICC = 0.83; right ICC = 0.87; and left ICC = 0.81). The SEM and MDC values were below 1.29 and 3.01, respectively, for the inter-rater reliability. This study showed a good-to-excellent intra- and inter-reliability and good responsiveness in the new device to measure different directions of tongue force in an asymptomatic population. This could be a new, more accessible tool to consider and add to the assessment and treatment of different clinical conditions in which a deficit in tongue force could be found.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Measurements of tongue force are important in clinical practice during both the diagnostic process and rehabilitation progress. It has been shown that patients with chronic temporomandibular disorders have less tongue strength than asymptomatic subjects. Currently, there are few devices to measure tongue force on the market, with different limitations. That is why a new device has been developed to overcome them. The objectives of the study were to determine the intra- and inter-rater reliability and the responsiveness of a new low-cost device to evaluate tongue force in an asymptomatic population.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
Two examiners assessed the maximal tongue force in 26 asymptomatic subjects using a developed prototype of an Arduino device. Each examiner performed a total of eight measurements of tongue force in each subject. Each tongue direction was measured twice (elevation, depression, right lateralization, and left lateralization) in order to test the intrarater reliability.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The intrarater reliability using the new device was excellent for the measurements of the tongue force for up (ICC > 0.94), down (ICC > 0.93) and right (ICC > 0.92) movements, and good for the left movement (ICC > 0.82). The SEM and MDC values were below 0.98 and 2.30, respectively, for the intrarater reliability analysis. Regarding the inter-rater reliability, the ICC was excellent for measuring the tongue up movements (ICC = 0.94), and good for all the others (down ICC = 0.83; right ICC = 0.87; and left ICC = 0.81). The SEM and MDC values were below 1.29 and 3.01, respectively, for the inter-rater reliability.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This study showed a good-to-excellent intra- and inter-reliability and good responsiveness in the new device to measure different directions of tongue force in an asymptomatic population. This could be a new, more accessible tool to consider and add to the assessment and treatment of different clinical conditions in which a deficit in tongue force could be found.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37240837
pii: life13051192
doi: 10.3390/life13051192
pmc: PMC10224525
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Anat Rec (Hoboken). 2013 Jul;296(7):1102-14
pubmed: 23650264
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2019 Feb;117:198-203
pubmed: 30579082
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2014 Nov;271(11):3077-84
pubmed: 24970288
Muscle Nerve. 2018 Sep;58(3):413-417
pubmed: 29901230
Int J Mol Sci. 2016 Jul 22;17(7):
pubmed: 27455250
Dysphagia. 2013 Sep;28(3):350-69
pubmed: 23468283
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2017 Nov 08;26(4):1296-1303
pubmed: 29098271
Head Neck. 2019 Jul;41(7):2197-2207
pubmed: 30793811
J Strength Cond Res. 2005 Feb;19(1):231-40
pubmed: 15705040
Gerontology. 2016;62(6):571-580
pubmed: 26963569
Respir Physiol Neurobiol. 2005 Jul 28;147(2-3):177-89
pubmed: 16087147
J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Jan;64(1):96-106
pubmed: 21130355
Cureus. 2018 Dec 5;10(12):e3695
pubmed: 30838167
Lancet. 1995 Oct 21;346(8982):1085-7
pubmed: 7564793
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018 Feb 15;61(2):257-265
pubmed: 29396576
Dysphagia. 2008 Mar;23(1):16-25
pubmed: 17602265
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2021 Apr;22(4):766-772
pubmed: 33229307
Am J Ophthalmol. 2009 Jul;148(1):4-6
pubmed: 19540984
J Biopharm Stat. 2004 Feb;14(1):97-110
pubmed: 15027502
Heliyon. 2022 Dec 05;8(12):e12050
pubmed: 36506403
J Oral Sci. 2017;59(2):183-188
pubmed: 28637976
J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Dec;27(12):3631-4
pubmed: 26834320
Dysphagia. 2014 Feb;29(1):83-95
pubmed: 24045852
Life (Basel). 2023 Jan 13;13(1):
pubmed: 36676178
Stat Med. 1998 Jan 15;17(1):101-10
pubmed: 9463853
Stat Med. 1987 Jun;6(4):441-8
pubmed: 3629046
Dysphagia. 2013 Dec;28(4):575-81
pubmed: 23677389
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015 Mar 24;12:32
pubmed: 25889828
Phys Ther. 2006 May;86(5):735-43
pubmed: 16649896
Dysphagia. 2006 Apr;21(2):102-11
pubmed: 16685469
Dysphagia. 2009 Jun;24(2):137-44
pubmed: 18956230
Dysphagia. 2019 Jun;34(3):315-324
pubmed: 30209561
Minerva Stomatol. 2009 Nov-Dec;58(11-12):567-76
pubmed: 20027127
Dysphagia. 2006 Jan;21(1):28-37
pubmed: 16544088
J Prosthodont Res. 2020 Apr;64(2):188-192
pubmed: 31767381