Sankah B1,2
1University of Southampton, Faculty of Health Sciences, Southampton, United Kingdom, 2Korle Bu Teaching Hospital, Physiotherapy, Accra, Ghana
Background: Tape measure measurement is the common most widely used outcome measure for limb length and leg length discrepancies assessment in musculoskeletal health, however its accuracy and reliability is a continuous debate among many practitioners today. The major challenge is the lack of definite consensus by clinicians and researchers on the most appropriate route (distances between bony landmarks) to employ during measurements.
Purpose: This narrative review was undertaken to evaluate the validity and reliability of tape measure measurements, highlight some challenges in its clinical application and disseminate evidenced-based recommendations in the appropriate use of the tape measure in physiotherapy clinical assessment.
Methods: A narrative review approach was used. A search for quantitative research studies between January 2005 and April 2015 was undertaken in MEDLINE and CINAHL. Hand searching of journals and relevant books was also undertaken. Data was qualitatively combined.
Results: Seven articles (4 repeated measure studies, 2 prospective studies and 1 systematic review) were reviewed. Evidence from five studies revealed that tape measure measurement demonstrated good validity with better intra-rater and inter-rater reliability in comparison to the block and computerized tomography methods. However, two out of the seven studies reviewed posited tape measure measurement as a less accurate clinical measure for leg length discrepancy compared to the block method.
Conclusion(s): The tape measure is a suitable and highly recommended outcome measure for the accurate and reliable clinical evaluation of leg length discrepancy. However, physiotherapists may consider the block method as an additional or alternative outcome measure for leg length discrepancy assessments.
Implications: For the effective use of the tape measure, physiotherapists must employ the route from anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) to the lateral malleolus rather the ASIS to the medial malleolus and use of the mean of two or more values rather than one measured value for accurate results.
Keywords: Tape measure measurement, leg length discrepancy, narrative review
Funding acknowledgements: There was no funding for this review
Purpose: This narrative review was undertaken to evaluate the validity and reliability of tape measure measurements, highlight some challenges in its clinical application and disseminate evidenced-based recommendations in the appropriate use of the tape measure in physiotherapy clinical assessment.
Methods: A narrative review approach was used. A search for quantitative research studies between January 2005 and April 2015 was undertaken in MEDLINE and CINAHL. Hand searching of journals and relevant books was also undertaken. Data was qualitatively combined.
Results: Seven articles (4 repeated measure studies, 2 prospective studies and 1 systematic review) were reviewed. Evidence from five studies revealed that tape measure measurement demonstrated good validity with better intra-rater and inter-rater reliability in comparison to the block and computerized tomography methods. However, two out of the seven studies reviewed posited tape measure measurement as a less accurate clinical measure for leg length discrepancy compared to the block method.
Conclusion(s): The tape measure is a suitable and highly recommended outcome measure for the accurate and reliable clinical evaluation of leg length discrepancy. However, physiotherapists may consider the block method as an additional or alternative outcome measure for leg length discrepancy assessments.
Implications: For the effective use of the tape measure, physiotherapists must employ the route from anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) to the lateral malleolus rather the ASIS to the medial malleolus and use of the mean of two or more values rather than one measured value for accurate results.
Keywords: Tape measure measurement, leg length discrepancy, narrative review
Funding acknowledgements: There was no funding for this review
Topic: Outcome measurement
Ethics approval required: No
Institution: Glasgow Caledonian University
Ethics committee: Glasgow Caledonian University ethics committee
Reason not required: This review did not require ethical approval since it is a review of already published work.
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
