Comparison of strength testing modalities in dysferlinopathy

• Published in: Muscle & nerve Vol. 66; no. 2; pp. 159 - 166
• Main Authors: Reash, Natalie F., James, Meredith K., Alfano, Lindsay N., Mayhew, Anna G., Jacobs, Marni, Iammarino, Megan A., Holsten, Scott, Sakamoto, Chikako, Tateishi, Takayuki, Yajima, Hiroyuki, Duong, Tina, Wolf, Brittney, Gee, Richard, Bharucha‐Goebel, Diana X., Bravver, Elena, Mori‐Yoshimura, Madoka, Bushby, Kate, Rufibach, Laura E., Straub, Volker, Lowes, Linda P.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Hoboken, USA John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.08.2022; Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
• Subjects: dysferlinopathy; Evaluation; handheld dynamometry; Heterogeneity; limb girdle muscular dystrophy; Muscle strength; outcome measure; Patients; Reliability analysis; Sensitivity analysis; strength; Strength testing; Variability; outcome measure; handheld dynamometry; strength; limb girdle muscular dystrophy; dysferlinopathy
• ISSN: 0148-639X; 1097-4598
• DOI: 10.1002/mus.27570

Introduction/Aims Dysferlinopathy demonstrates heterogeneity in muscle weakness between patients, which can progress at different rates over time. Changing muscle strength due to disease progression or from an investigational product is associated with changing functional ability. The purpose of this study was to compare three methods of strength testing used in the Clinical Outcome Study (COS) for dysferlinopathy to understand which method and which muscle groups were most sensitive to change over time. Methods Patients were evaluated at each study visit using functional scales, manual muscle testing, and handheld dynamometry (HHD) at all 15 sites. A fixed‐frame system (Fixed) was used at a subset of seven sites. Screening and baseline visits were evaluated for reliability. Data over a 1‐year period were analyzed to determine sensitivity to change among strength modalities and individual muscle groups. Results HHD and Fixed captured significant change across 1 year in summed muscle strength score of four muscle groups (P < .01). Strength summed scores were significantly correlated with functional scales (rho = 0.68‐0.92, P < .001). Individual muscle groups, however, showed high levels of variability between visits. Discussion Although both HHD and Fixed demonstrate change over 12 months, HHD is a less expensive option that provides data on a continuous scale and may be easier to implement. Due to variability in strength measures, researchers should carefully consider use of strength testing as an outcome and may wish to select functional measures with less variability as clinical trial endpoints.