Key result
A vascular function test battery showed moderate to excellent repeatability and reproducibility for most measures (ICC 0.53-0.96), but poor reproducibility for DVP reflection index and LDI.
Why the study?
There is a dearth of information regarding the reliability of non-invasive measures of vascular function taken in a single testing session.
What is the intra- and inter-session reliability of a battery of non-invasive vascular function measures in non-smoking males?
Observational (n=21)
What is the intra- and inter-session reliability of a battery of non-invasive vascular function measures in non-smoking males?
There is considerable variability in the repeatability and reproducibility of non-invasive vascular function measurements, which requires careful consideration in future research designs.
Caution advised for DVP reflection index and LDI in assessments; leaves open optimal vascular test selection for research.
There is a dearth of information regarding the reliability of non-invasive measures of vascular function taken in a single testing session. This study aimed to determine the test-retest reliability of a test battery of vascular function measures: automated blood pressure (BP), laser Doppler imaging with iontophoresis (LDI), digital volume pulse (DVP), pulse wave velocity (PWV), augmentation index (AIx) measured by pulse wave analysis (PWA) and flow-mediated dilation (FMD) taken within and between sessions. Measures were taken in 21 non-smoking males intra-session and again inter-session (one week apart) to determine repeatability and reproducibility, respectively. There was moderate to excellent repeatability (ICC: 0.53-0.93; CV=2.2-18.1%) and reproducibility (ICC: 0.71-0.96; CV 1.9-14.2%) for BP, DVP stiffness index, PWV, AIx, AIx normalised to heart rate (75 bpm), absolute and percentage FMD. Repeatability of the DVP reflection index was moderate (ICC: 0.64; CV=9.5%) but there was poor reproducibility (ICC: 0.17; CV=15.1%). Moreover, the repeatability and reproducibility of the LDI measures ranged from poor to good (ICC: 0.31-0.84; CV=28.4-36.7%). These data indicated that there was considerable variability in the repeatability and reproducibility of measurements of endothelial function and arterial stiffness taken in a battery of measurements, which needs careful consideration in future research designs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kimble et al. (2019) reported an observational. Vascular function test battery was evaluated on Test-retest reliability (repeatability and reproducibility). A vascular function test battery showed moderate to excellent repeatability and reproducibility for most measures (ICC 0.53-0.96), but poor reproducibility for DVP reflection index and LDI.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: