Restricted access

Purchase article

USD  $24.95

Student 1 year online subscription

USD  $76.00

1 year online subscription

USD  $101.00

Student 2 year online subscription

USD  $144.00

2 year online subscription

USD  $192.00

Context: The treatment of edema after a knee injury is usually 1 of the main objectives during rehabilitation. To assess the success of treatment, 2 methods are commonly used in clinical practice: volumetry and perimetry. Objective: To investigate the intra- and interassessor reliability of volumetry and perimetry to assess knee volume. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Laboratory. Participants: 45 health participants (26 women) with mean age of 22.4 ± 2.8 y. Main Outcome Measures: Knee volume was assessed by 3 assessors (A, B, and C) with 3 methods (lower-limb volumetry [LLV], knee volumetry [KV], and knee perimetry [KP]). Assessor A was the most-experienced assessor, and assessor C, the least experienced. LLV and KV were performed with participants in the orthostatic position, while KP was performed with participants in supine. Results: For the interassessor analysis, the ICC2,1 was high (.82) for KV and very high for LLV (.99) and KP (.99). For the intra-assessor analysis, ICC2,1 ranged from moderate to high for KV (.69-.83) and was very high for LLV (.99) and KP (.97-.99). Conclusion: KV, LLV, and KP are reliable methods, both intra- and interassessor, to measure knee volume.

Nunes, Teixeira, Karloh, and Yamashitafuji are with the Dept of Physiotherapy, Santa Catarina State University, Florianopolis, Brazil. Wageck is with the Dept of Rehabilitation, Nutrition and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia. de Noronha is with the Dept of Community and Allied Health, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Australia.

Nunes ( is corresponding author.