Reliability and Concurrent Validity of the Ring Gauge Method and the Metacarpal Head Tape Measure Method of Measuring Hand Size

Background: There are several methods for measuring edema of the hand. While the volumetric techniques, finger circumference measurement, and figure-of-eight techniques have undergone extensive psychometric testing, alternative methods of measuring hand size, such as circumferential finger size determination using a ring gauge (ring gauge method; RGM) and tape measurement of hand girth taken along the distal palmar crease (metacarpal head tape measure method; MHTM), have not. This study's aim is to examine the reliability and validity of the RGM and the MHTM.

Methods: In this cross-sectional study, two examiners measured 22 hands in 22 patients with hand edema using the RGM and the MHTM 3 times each to determine intra- and inter-tester reliability. The validity of each method was established using the finger circumference measurement and figure-of-eight method, respectively.

Results: The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) obtained for intra-tester reliability was 0.99–0.98 for both methods. ICCs for inter-tester reliability were 0.97–0.98 for the RGM and 0.98 for the MHTM. Pearson product-moment correlation values between the RGM and finger circumference measurement were 0.92–0.96, while those between the MHTM and figure-of-eight method were 0.84–0.90.

Conclusions: The RGM and the MHTM are reliable and valid evaluation tools for the assessment of hand size.