Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39150968›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Handheld dynamometry: Validity and reliability of measuring hip joint rate of torque development and peak torque.

Katherine McNabb, María B Sánchez, James Selfe, Neil D Reeves, Michael Callaghan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Katherine McNabbDepartment of Health Professions, Faculty of Health and Education, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0009-3617-7450
María B SánchezDepartment of Health Professions, Faculty of Health and Education, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4099-3970
James SelfeDepartment of Health Professions, Faculty of Health and Education, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Neil D ReevesDepartment of Life Sciences, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9213-4580
Michael CallaghanDepartment of Health Professions, Faculty of Health and Education, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMeasuring rate of torque development (RTD) and peak torque (PT) for hip muscle performance presents challenges in clinical practice. This study investigated the construct validity of a handheld dynamometer (HHD) versus an isokinetic dynamometer (IKD), and intra-rater repeated reliability for RTD and PT and their relationship in hip joint movements.

methodsThirty healthy individuals (mean age = 30 ± 8 years, 13 males) underwent two test sessions in a single day. RTD (0-50, 0-100, 0-150, 0-200ms) and PT normalised to body mass in maximal voluntary isometric contractions were measured using a HHD and an IKD in hip flexion, extension, abduction, adduction, internal and external rotation.

resultsFor validity between the devices, RTD0-50 exhibited the largest significant systematic bias in all hip movements (3.41-11.99 Nm·s-1 kg-1) and widest limits-of-agreement, while RTD0-200 had the lowest bias (-1.33-3.99 Nm·s-1 kg-1) and narrowest limits-of-agreement. For PT, agreement between dynamometers was observed for hip flexion (0.08 Nm·kg-1), abduction (-0.09 Nm·kg-1), internal (-0.01 Nm·kg-1), and external rotation (0.05 Nm·kg-1). For reliability, intra-rater intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC2,1) ranged from moderate to good in RTD0-50 and RTD0-100 (0.5-0.88), and good to excellent in RTD0-150 and RTD0-200 (0.87-0.95) in all movements. The HHD displayed excellent intra-rater, relative reliability values (ICC2,1) in all movements (0.85-0.95). Pearson's correlation revealed good linear correlation between PT and RTD0-150 and RTD0-200 in all movements (r = .7 to .87, p = < .001).

conclusionValidity analysis demonstrated significant systematic bias and lack of agreement in RTD measures between the HHD and IKD. However, the HHD displays excellent to moderate intra-rater, relative reliability for RTD and PT measures in hip movements. Clinicians may use the HHD for hip muscle PT assessment but note, late phase RTD measures are more reliable, valid, and relate to PT than early phase RTD. Additionally, the correlation between RTD and PT at various time epochs was examined to better understand the relationship between these measures.

Indexed as

Hip JointIsometric ContractionMuscle Strength DynamometerTorqueAdultFemaleHumansMaleMuscle, SkeletalRange of Motion, ArticularReproducibility of ResultsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39150968
PMCPMC11329127

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.