This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Labs, K.-H. Articles by Jaeger, K. A Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Labs, K.-H. Articles by Jaeger, K. A Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The reliability of leg circumference assessment: a comparison of spring tape measurements and optoelectronic volumetry

Department of Angiology, University of Basel Medical School, Basel, Switzerland

Martin Tschoepl

Department of Angiology, University of Basel Medical School, Basel, Switzerland

Giancesare Gamba

Biometrix SA, Gland, Switzerland

Markus Aschwanden

Department of Angiology, University of Basel Medical School, Basel, Switzerland

Kurt A Jaeger

Department of Angiology, University of Basel Medical School, Basel, Switzerland

The purpose of this study was to compare the reliability of repeated spring tape measurements with optoelectronic volumeter measurements for the assessment of lower leg circumferences. The limb circumferences at mid-calf and ankle level of both legs were measured three times using a spring tape measure as well as an optoelectronic volumeter. In all, 30 healthy volunteers participated in the study. Test reliability and repeatability were described through the process-related and between-subject variances and variance-derived parameters such as the reliability coefficient (intraclass correlation coefficient, RC), the relative precision (RP), and the coefficient of repeatability (CR). A higher value for the RC and a lower value for the RP indicate that the test variability is predominantly due to between-subject variance and not to test process-related variance. RCs for both methods, independent of whether measurements were taken at calf or at ankle level, always exceeded 0.95. RPs were in the same order of magnitude for both methods but lower for measurements at calf than at ankle level (range: RP_calf 6.36-8.74%; range: RPankle 12.49-18.56%). CRs for both methods were low and of comparable magnitude (CR range: 4.8-7.7), although slightly smaller for the spring tape. When measurement results from the spring tape and the volumeter were compared, results achieved with the volumeter were significantly longer than those from the spring tape (p, 0.05). Results from both methods were linearly in good agreement and there was no proportional bias; differences shown were due to a significant constant bias regarding the volumeter. Circumference measurements taken by spring tape and by optoelectronic volumetry are both characterized by a comparably high reliability. However, these methods cannot be used in an interchangeable way because a constant bias exists for volumetry, resulting in significantly larger circumferences compared with those measured using the spring tape.

Key Words: circumference measurement • intra-class correlation coefficients • optoelectronic volumetry • peripheral edema • repeatability • spring tape

Vascular Medicine, Vol. 5, No. 2, 69-74 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/1358836X0000500202


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Friends, E. Augustine, and J. Danoff A Comparison of Different Assessment Techniques for Measuring Foot and Ankle Volume in Healthy Adults J Am Podiatr Med Assoc, March 1, 2008; 98(2): 85 - 94. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Tunc, A. Caglayan-Tunc, G. Kisakol, G. K. Unler, T. Hidayetoglu, and H. Yazici Intraobserver and Interobserver Agreements of Leg Circumference Measurements by Tape Measure Based on 3 Reference Points Angiology, November 1, 2007; 58(5): 593 - 596. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Berard, X. Kurz, F. Zuccarelli, and L. Abenhaim Validity of the Leg-O-Meter, an Instrument to Measure Leg Circumference Angiology, January 1, 2002; 53(1): 21 - 28. [Abstract] [PDF]