Conclusion: The myotonometer reliably measures muscle properties with good relative and absolute relability. These results are useful for clinicians and researchers to reliably assess muscle characteristics and determine whether real change has occurred in groups and at certain levels of stroke patients. The most common method used to assess reliability is the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). There is no clear definition of an acceptable CCI and values above 0.70 are often used as minimum standards for good reliability [22, 29]. Interpretation of the ICC value should also include a reflection on the clinical relevance of the results [22]. The ICC values in this study are considered to be high and well above our acceptable minimum of 0.8 set at the outset. In addition, the lower limit of 95% confidence intervals was also greater than 0.8 for tug and 30s-CST, with one exception. The relative reliability observed in this study therefore appears not only good, but also clinically relevant. Results: Intraclassin correlation coefficients ranged from 0.83 to 0.95 for muscle tone, elasticity and stiffness of all muscle groups.

SEM and the smallest real difference between muscle tone, elasticity and bicep stiffness were the smallest of the 6 muscles tested. Bland Altman`s analyses did not reveal a systematic distortion between most of the repeated measurements. Compared to other muscles, the biceps had narrower match limits, suggesting that myotonometric measurements of the biceps had greater stability and less variation over time. Unlike the correlation coefficients described above, which assess the relationship between two variables, CCI evaluates the agreement. The variables can come from either replication measures using the same method (reliability), or two (or more) methods that measure the same phenomenon (validity). Because CCI assesses the consistency between the data, it is generally used to determine absolute validity or reliability. Results: With the exception of standing balance (ICC – 0.49), 2.4 m walk (ICC – 0.68), functional range (ICC – 0.38) and static time (ICC – 0.47), all measures were found to be acceptable (>0.71) ICCs. However, only anthropometric measurements showed an acceptable absolute level of reliability (>10% TFT). Bland-Altman`s analysis showed non-significant average differences (p > 0.05) and eight of the 17 measures with wide accord boundaries (LoA). The aim is to study the relative and absolute commitments of the myotonometer.

One of the drawbacks of TUG is the effect of the ceiling in the group of patients with relatively good walking capacity [4]. In the study originally described by TUG, no assistance next to the participants was permitted to take the device on foot [5]. In clinical practice, TUG is generally performed with low physical or verbal support from the physiotherapist that allows the physiotherapist to assess functional performance, including in the group of patients with lower functional activity. When authorizing physical or verbal assistance, it should be noted that this is a departure from the initial test and that, therefore, the results of this study should not be applied in strict compliance with the original protocol. Meaning tests for correlation coefficients should be interpreted with caution in relation to reliability and validity. It would be quite unexpected to find that two measures of the same phenomenon are not related to some extent. Moreover, it is plausible that the highly correlated measurement data have very little agreement. Therefore, the use of correlation coefficients does not detect systematic distortion [9].

However, it may not be necessary to obtain absolute validity or reliability based on the research question, for example, if an accurate classification of individuals within a population is necessary, as in a study of a lifestyle disease association [6]. In such a study, a method with relative reliability and validity, demonstrated by correlation, may be appropriate.