Assessment of Limb Muscle Strength in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review

Objectives:To determine the reliability of volitional and nonvolitional limb muscle strength assessment in critically ill patients and to provide guidelines for the implementation of limb muscle strength assessment this population. Data Sources:The following computerized bibliographic databases were searched with MeSH terms and keywords or combinations: MEDLINE through PubMed and Embase through Embase.com. Study Selection:Articles were screened by two independent reviewers. Included studies were all performed in humans and were original articles. The research population exists of adult, critically ill patients or ICU survivors of either sex, and those admitted to a medical, surgical, respiratory, or mixed ICU. A study was included if reliability of muscle strength measurements was determined in this population. Data Extraction:Data on baseline characteristics (country, study population, eligibility, age, setting and method, and equipment of limb muscle strength assessment) and reliability scores were obtained by two independent reviewers. Data Synthesis:Data of six observational studies were analyzed. Interrater reliability of the Medical Research Council scale for individual muscle groups varied from “fair” or “substantial” (weighted &kgr;, 0.23–0.64) to “very good” agreement (weighted &kgr;, 0.80–0.96). Interrater reliability of the Medical Research Council-sum score was found to be very good in all four studies (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.86–0.99 or Pearson product moment correlation coefficient = 0.96). Interrater reliability of handheld dynamometry was comparable between two studies (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.62–0.96). Interrater reliability of handgrip dynamometry was very good in two studies (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.89–0.97). Intrarater reliability of handheld dynamometry and handgrip dynamometry was assessed in one study, and results were very good (intraclass correlation coefficients > 0.81). No studies were obtained on reliability of nonvolitional muscle strength assessment. Conclusions:Voluntary muscle strength measurement has proven reliable in critically ill patients provided that strict guidelines on adequacy and standardized test procedures and positions are followed.

[1]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[2]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[3]  R. Maughan,et al.  Strength and cross‐sectional area of human skeletal muscle. , 1983, The Journal of physiology.

[4]  P. Schmitz,et al.  Interobserver agreement in the assessment of muscle strength and functional abilities in Guillain‐Barré syndrome , 1991, Muscle & nerve.

[5]  R. Reed,et al.  The Relationship between Muscle Mass and Muscle Strength in the Elderly , 1991, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[6]  M E Cohen,et al.  Relationship between two measures of upper extremity strength: manual muscle test compared to hand-held myometry. , 1992, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[7]  R W Bohannon,et al.  Normative values for isometric muscle force measurements obtained with hand-held dynamometers. , 1996, Physical therapy.

[8]  R W Bohannon,et al.  Reference values for extremity muscle strength obtained by hand-held dynamometry from adults aged 20 to 79 years. , 1997, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[9]  H. Payette,et al.  Muscle strength and functional mobility in relation to lean body mass in free-living frail elderly women , 1998, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

[10]  M. Polkey,et al.  Adductor pollicis twitch tension assessed by magnetic stimulation of the ulnar nerve. , 2000, American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine.

[11]  Richard W. Bohannon.  Measuring Knee Extensor Muscle Strength , 2001, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[12]  Isabelle Durand-Zaleski,et al.  Paresis acquired in the intensive care unit: a prospective multicenter study. , 2002, JAMA.

[13]  F. Pouwer,et al.  Are factor analytical techniques used appropriately in the validation of health status questionnaires? A systematic review on the quality of factor analysis of the SF-36 , 2005, Quality of Life Research.

[14]  Laurent Brochard,et al.  Does ICU-acquired paresis lengthen weaning from mechanical ventilation? , 2004, Intensive Care Medicine.

[15]  I. Campbell,et al.  Muscle wasting and energy balance in critical illness. , 2004, Clinical nutrition.

[16]  A. Beelen,et al.  Functional outcome in patients with critical illness polyneuropathy , 2004, Disability and rehabilitation.

[17]  D. Spanier,et al.  Break-technique handheld dynamometry: relation between angular velocity and strength measurements. , 2005, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[18]  Richard W. Bohannon.  Manual muscle testing: does it meet the standards of an adequate screening test? , 2005, Clinical rehabilitation.

[19]  Richard W. Bohannon.  Hand‐Grip Dynamometry Predicts Future Outcomes in Aging Adults , 2008, Journal of geriatric physical therapy.

[20]  Richard W. Bohannon.  Is it Legitimate to Characterize Muscle Strength Using a Limited Number of Measures? , 2008, Journal of strength and conditioning research.

[21]  B. de Jonghe,et al.  Clinical review: Critical illness polyneuropathy and myopathy , 2008, Critical care.

[22]  S. Lemeshow,et al.  Acquired weakness, handgrip strength, and mortality in critically ill patients. , 2008, American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine.

[23]  F. Kainberger,et al.  Muscle wasting in intensive care patients: ultrasound observation of the M. quadriceps femoris muscle layer. , 2008, Journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[24]  D. Needham,et al.  A framework for diagnosing and classifying intensive care unit-acquired weakness. , 2009, Critical care medicine.

[25]  C. Terwee,et al.  The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study , 2010, Quality of Life Research.

[26]  Scott L. Zeger,et al.  Inter-rater reliability of manual muscle strength testing in ICU survivors and simulated patients , 2010, Intensive Care Medicine.

[27]  C. Terwee,et al.  Inter-rater agreement and reliability of the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments) Checklist , 2010, BMC medical research methodology.

[28]  C. Hough,et al.  Manual muscle strength testing of critically ill patients: feasibility and interobserver agreement , 2011, Critical care.

[29]  G. Van den Berghe,et al.  The interobserver agreement of handheld dynamometry for muscle strength assessment in critically ill patients , 2011, Critical care medicine.

[30]  J. Kirk-Bayley,et al.  Functional Disability 5 Years after Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome , 2011 .

[31]  E. Bittner,et al.  Global Muscle Strength But Not Grip Strength Predicts Mortality and Length of Stay in a General Population in a Surgical Intensive Care Unit , 2012, Physical Therapy.

[32]  G. Van den Berghe,et al.  Interobserver agreement of medical research council sum‐score and handgrip strength in the intensive care unit , 2012, Muscle & nerve.

[33]  J. Paratz,et al.  Muscle strength assessment in critically ill patients with handheld dynamometry: an investigation of reliability, minimal detectable change, and time to peak force generation. , 2013, Journal of critical care.