ArticleSports health
Validating the Cambridge Protocol: Reliability of Hip Muscle Strength Measurements Using a Motorized Dynamometer and Electromyography.
Article in Sports health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMuscle weakness is common after injury in athletes and in the presence of hip pathology. It will cause abnormal hip biomechanics and can predict future injury. However, objective measurement of hip muscle strength is difficult to perform accurately and reliably. Therefore, it is challenging to determine when an athlete has returned to preinjury levels of strength. In addition, there is currently no standardized method of obtaining measurements, which prevents the data being compared or shared between research centers. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to comprehensively assess the inter- and intraobserver reliability of our standardized muscle strength measurement protocol. STUDY
designDescriptive laboratory study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3, inception cohort study.
methodsA total of 16 healthy male volunteers (age = 28.3 ± 7.9 years) were recruited. Those with a previous history of hip injuries or disorders were excluded. These volunteers underwent strength testing according to the Cambridge Protocol on 4 separate occasions, performed by 2 independent assessors. Maximal voluntary contractions, fatigue torque fluctuations, and electromyography measurements were recorded. Intra- and interobserver reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
resultsGood-to-excellent correlation was seen for both intra- and interobserver reliability across almost all hip movements for maximal contractions: ICC ranged 0.78 to 0.93 and 0.78 to 0.96, respectively. The standard error of the mean for all hip movements was also extremely low at 2% to 3%.
conclusionThe Cambridge Protocol is a highly reliable method for objective measurement of hip muscle strength. We recommend future studies use this protocol, or the principles underpinning it, to enable data sharing and comparison across different studies. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This is a description and analysis of hip muscle strength measurement. If widely used, it will allow for accurate and objective strength assessment and closer monitoring of hip injuries and pathology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.