ArticleThe Journal of hand surgery2024
Test-Retest Reliability and Precision of the Rotterdam Intrinsic Hand Myometer.
Article in The Journal of hand surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Design and Validation of a Hand Interossei Muscle Dynamometer (HIMDNA) for Finger Abduction and Adduction Strength Measurement.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Interrater Reliability and Precision of a Novel Hand Strength Assessment and Treatment Device: The GripAble.The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to determine the test-retest reliability and precision of Rotterdam Intrinsic Hand Myometer (RIHM) in healthy adults.
methodsTwenty-nine participants originally recruited via convenience sampling at a Midwestern state fair returned approximately 8 days later for retest. An average of three trials for each of the five intrinsic hand strength measurements were collected using the same technique that was used during initial testing. Test-retest reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient or ICC
resultsAcross all measures of intrinsic strength, the RIHM and its standardized procedures had excellent test-retest reliability. Index finger metacarpophalangeal flexion demonstrated the lowest reliability, and right small finger abduction, left thumb carpometacarpal abduction, and index finger metacarpophalangeal abduction tests had the highest reliability. Precision, as evidenced by SEM and MDC values, was excellent for tests of left index and bilateral small finger abduction strength and acceptable for all other measurements.
conclusionsTest-retest reliability and precision of RIHM across all measurements was excellent. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These findings indicate that RIHM is a reliable and precise tool in measuring intrinsic strength of hands of healthy adults, although further research is needed in clinical populations.
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.