Abstract

Background: Sensorimotor impairments are common following sports injuries. Electrical Threshold Testing (ETT) is a promising quantitative sensory testing (QST) tool that allows the assessment of sensory deficits, motor recruitment, and pain perception. Although various protocols have been proposed, direct comparisons between studies and protocols remain difficult due to methodological inconsistencies, particularly regarding the number of measurements used, which significantly affect reliability. The main objective was to determine the number of trials required to obtain reliable measurements of electrical sensory threshold (EST), electrical motor threshold (EMT), and electrical pain threshold (EPT) in terms of both intra- and interday reliability. Methods: In this repeated-measures study, 14 active participants underwent three electrical stimulation protocols (sensory, motor, and pain) and performed five measurements per threshold. Averages of 1 to 5 measurements were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Results: For EST, averaging multiple trials yielded good-to-excellent intra- and interday reliability (ICCs = 0.778–0.964). For EMT, intraday reliability was excellent (ICCs > 0.928), but interday stability remained moderate depending on the performed test. For EPT, intraday reliability was good to excellent (ICCs = 0.812–0.957), whereas interday stability (ICCs > 0.782) required averaging at least three trials. Single-trial assessments provided insufficient precision across all thresholds. Conclusions: Implementing a standardized protocol of three-averaged trials, including EST, EMT and EPT, appears to be an optimal, reliable, and time-efficient balance for clinical settings. These findings may contribute to ETT standardization in active populations, enhancing clinical efficiency, and supporting its use as a reliable tool for assessing sensorimotor impairments and monitoring treatment outcomes.

IPC Classification

Keywords