A comparison of two portable dynamometers in the assessment of shoulder and elbow strength

Abstract Objectives To compare the practical applicability and measurement properties of a hand-held dynamometer (MicroFET2 ® ) and a fixed dynamometer (Isobex2.1 ® ) in determining isometric strength of the shoulder and elbow. Design Muscle strength in four directions (glenohumeral abduction, external rotation and elevation and elbow flexion) was measured using both instruments by two examiners. The assessments were repeated by one of the examiners 3 days later. Setting Leiden University Medical Center. Participants Twenty healthy volunteers. Main outcome measures Time to complete a set of measurements and discomfort were recorded. To determine intra- and inter-observer reliability, intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs), limits of agreement and smallest detectable difference were computed. Results The time to complete a set of measurements was significantly shorter for the hand-held dynamometer than for the fixed dynamometer in both examiners. The number of subjects reporting discomfort was similar with the two dynamometers. Except for glenohumeral abduction, the forces measured using the hand-held dynamometer were significantly higher than those when using the fixed dynamometer in both examiners. The intra- and inter-observer ICCs for the four directions ranged from 0.82 to 0.98 for both dynamometers. However, the mean differences between replications and the wide limits of agreement suggest substantial bias and variability. For example, for the measurement of shoulder abduction with the fixed dynamometer by one tester (190N), the results suggest that on 95% of occasions the second tester's measurement would be between 158 and 275N. Conclusions Although time taken and discomfort should be considered in the selection of dynamometers, due consideration should be given to the significant differences in absolute results. Neither the dynamometers nor the testers can be considered interchangeable. Both the intra- and inter-observer reliability of the two dynamometers were similar, yet both demonstrated systematic bias and variability in the measurements obtained.

[1]  J. Brinkmann.  Comparison of a hand-held and fixed dynamometer in measuring strength of patients with neuromuscular disease. , 1994, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[2]  G. Murrell,et al.  Reliability of 3 methods for assessing shoulder strength. , 2002, Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery.

[3]  P. Dagnelie,et al.  Randomized clinical trial of adenosine 5'-triphosphate in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. , 2000, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[4]  Richard W. Bohannon,et al.  Hand-held Dynamometer Measurements: Tester Strength Makes a Difference. , 1991, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[5]  C. Gerber,et al.  Clinical Outcome After Structural Failure of Rotator Cuff Repairs* , 2000, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  R W Bohannon,et al.  Make tests and break tests of elbow flexor muscle strength. , 1988, Physical therapy.

[7]  J. M. Bevan,et al.  Measurement in Medicine. , 1971 .

[8]  William D Middleton,et al.  The outcome and repair integrity of completely arthroscopically repaired large and massive rotator cuff tears. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[9]  Alois Lustenberger,et al.  Outcome of pectoralis major transfer for the treatment of irreparable subscapularis tears. , 2003, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[10]  F. P. Kendall,et al.  Muscles, testing and function , 1971 .

[11]  M. Stokes,et al.  Reliability of assessment tools in rehabilitation: an illustration of appropriate statistical analyses , 1998, Clinical rehabilitation.

[12]  Douglas G. Altman,et al.  Measurement in Medicine: The Analysis of Method Comparison Studies , 1983 .

[13]  A. Bastian,et al.  Cerebellar subjects show impaired adaptation of anticipatory EMG during catching. , 1999, Journal of neurophysiology.

[14]  S. Bunnell.  Peripheral Nerve Injuries By the Nerve Injuries Committee of the Medical Research Council. Edited by H. J. Seddon. (Privy Council. Medical Research Council Special Report Series. No. 282.) London, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1954. 2 pounds, 15 shillings , 1955 .

[15]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[16]  L. Ombrédanne,et al.  Traité de chirurgie orthopédique , 1937 .

[17]  J. Iannotti,et al.  Intrarater and interrater reliability of three isometric dynamometers in assessing shoulder strength. , 1996, Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery.

[18]  E. Itoi,et al.  ISOKINETIC STRENGTH AFTER TEARS OF THE SUPRASPINATUS TENDON , 1997 .

[19]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[20]  Zeevi Dvir,et al.  Grade 4 in manual muscle testing: the problem with submaximal strength assessment , 1997, Clinical rehabilitation.

[21]  Nynke Smidt,et al.  Interobserver reproducibility of the assessment of severity of complaints, grip strength, and pressure pain threshold in patients with lateral epicondylitis. , 2002, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[22]  J. Zuckerman,et al.  Pain inhibition of shoulder strength in patients with impingement syndrome. , 1994, Orthopedics.