Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32142620›Full record

ArticleDisability and rehabilitation2021

Reliability, responsiveness, and validity of handheld dynamometry for assessing quadriceps strength in total knee arthroplasty.

Andrew J Kittelson, Jesse C Christensen, Brian J Loyd, Kristine L Burrows, Johna Iannitto, Jennifer E Stevens-Lapsley

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Disability and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew J KittelsonPhysical Therapy Program, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA.
Jesse C ChristensenDepartment of Physical Therapy and Athletic Training, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Brian J LoydDepartment of Physical Therapy and Athletic Training, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Kristine L BurrowsPhysical Therapy Program, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA.
Johna IannittoPhysical Therapy Program, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA.
Jennifer E Stevens-LapsleyPhysical Therapy Program, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA.
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus · USUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

MULTICENTER CAREER DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR PHYSICAL AND OCCUPATIONAL THERAPYK12HD055931 · NICHD · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI HAYES, MARCIE HARRIS · 2007 to 2021
$12.7M
University of Colorado Aging Training GrantT32AG000279 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Kerrie Moreau · 2001 to 2026
$10.1M
NIA NIH HHS T32 AG000279NICHD NIH HHS K12 HD055931
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo determine the reliability, responsiveness, validity, and agreement of handheld dynamometry, relative to electromechanical dynamometry, for assessing quadriceps strength surrounding total knee arthroplasty.

methodsFifty-six patients (48% female) undergoing total knee arthroplasty were assessed prior to surgery and at 2 and 6 weeks following surgery. Maximum isometric quadriceps force was assessed at each time point by handheld dynamometry and electromechanical dynamometry. Within-session test-retest reliability was determined by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Standard error of measurement and relative standard error (RSE) values were calculated. Standardized response means were used to describe responsiveness. Pearson's correlations examined construct validity. Agreement was assessed by the Bland-Altman method.

resultsBoth handheld dynamometry and electromechanical dynamometry demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (ICC >0.90) and RSE (<15%). Both methods were responsive, with large postoperative standardized response means of 1.57 (handheld dynamometry) and 1.37 (electromechanical dynamometry). Pearson's correlations were moderate to strong. The Bland-Altman analysis revealed underestimation of force by handheld dynamometry, although this effect was diminished in the early postoperative period.

conclusionsOur results suggest handheld dynamometry is a promising tool for monitoring quadriceps strength in patients pre- and post-total knee arthroplasty.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThis study provides evidence of high reliability and responsiveness of handheld dynamometry for assessing quadriceps strength throughout a clinically relevant time frame for patients with total knee arthroplasty.There is construct validity of handheld dynamometry for measuring quadriceps strength, with moderate to high correlations between handheld dynamometry and electromechanical dynamometry, both pre- and post-total knee arthroplasty.Rehabilitation professionals should be aware that handheld dynamometry and electromechanical dynamometry do not agree in terms of the force measurement itself; particularly at higher force values, handheld dynamometry underestimates force output relative to electromechanical dynamometry.Overall, this study supports the use of handheld dynamometry for monitoring quadriceps strength in clinical settings for patient with total knee arthroplasty.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeFemaleHumansMaleMuscle StrengthMuscle Strength DynamometerQuadriceps MuscleReproducibility of Resultshandheld dynamometryquadriceps strengthreliabilityresponsivenessTotal knee arthroplastyvalidity

Identifiers

PMID32142620
PMCPMC7483560
OpenAlexW3009659797

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.