4.0 Article

Test-Retest Reliability of Handgrip Strength as an Outcome Measure in Patients With Symptoms of Shoulder Impingement Syndrome

Journal

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2017.09.005

Keywords

Hand Strength; Muscle Strength Dynamometer; Shoulder Impingement Syndrome

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the degree of test-retest reliability of grip strength measurement using a hand dynamometer in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome. Methods: A total of 19 patients (10 women and 9 men; mean +/- standard deviation age, 33.2 +/- 12.9 years; range 1859 years) with shoulder impingement syndrome were measured using a hand dynamometer by the same data collector in 2 different testing sessions with a 7-day interval. During each session, patients were encouraged to exert 3 maximal isometric contractions on the affected hand and the mean value of the 3 efforts (measured in kilogram-force [Kgf]) was used for data analysis. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC2,1) as well as the standard error of measurement (SEM) and Bland-Altman plot were used to estimate the degree of test-retest reliability and the measurement error, respectively. Results: Grip strength data analysis revealed an ICC2,1 score of 0.94, which, based on the Shrout classification, is considered as excellent test-retest reliability of grip strength measurement. The small values of SEMs reported in both sessions (SEM1, 2.55 Kgf; SEM2, 2.39 Kgf) and the small width of the 95% limits of agreement in the Bland-Altman plot (ranging from -7.39 Kgf to 7.03 Kgf) reflected the measurement precision and the narrow variation of the differences during the 2 testing sessions. Conclusions: Results from this study identified excellent test-retest reliability of grip strength measurement in shoulder impingement syndrome, indicating its potential use as an outcome measure in clinical practice.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available