Diagnostic accuracy, validity, and reliability of Tensiomyography to assess muscle function and exercise-induced fatigue in healthy participants. A systematic review with meta-analysis. (August 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Lohr, C.; Schmidt, T.; Medina-Porqueres, I.; Braumann, K.-M.; Reer, R.; Porthun, J.
• Is Part Of: Journal of electromyography and kinesiology. Volume 47(2019)
• Page Start: 65
• Page End: 87
• Publication Date: 2019-08
• Subjects: Mechanomyography -- Muscle fatigue -- Validity -- Gender bias -- Systematic review; Electromyography -- Periodicals; Kinesiology -- Periodicals; Electromyography -- Periodicals; Movement -- physiology -- Periodicals; Muscles -- physiology -- Periodicals; Électromyographie -- Périodiques; Cinésiologie -- Périodiques; Electromyography; Kinesiology; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 616.740757
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2019.05.005
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1050-6411

Abstract

Abstract: Tensiomyography™ (TMG) is a non-invasive method to monitor skeletal muscle mechanical characteristics. This systematic review and meta-analysis reports on diagnostic accuracy, validity, and reliability of TMG (maximal radial displacement [Dm], contraction time [Tc], delay time [Td], and velocity of contraction [Vc]) to assess exercise-induced fatigue in healthy volunteers, with the specific aim to determine the current level of supporting evidence. Systematic literature searches within Medline, Embase and Sportdiscus databases were conducted from January 1990 through November 2018. Methodological quality was evaluated by the Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) tool or the Validity and Reliability Critical Appraisal Tool (CAT) or the Quality Appraisal of Diagnostic Reliability checklist (QAREL). Meta-analytical methods were utilised to summarize relative reliabilities of Dm, Tc, Td (95%, CI). The methodological quality of the 19 included studies (n = 373; female = 13.0%) ranged from low to high quality. The analysis revealed insufficient diagnostic accuracy and validity, mixed results regarding absolute reliability, and high to excellent relative reliability for the assessed measures. To conclude, robust evidence for diagnostic accuracy/validity of TMG has yet to be determined, whereas there is substantial evidence for its reliability. Higher methodological standards need to be established, including the avoidance of gender bias.