4.2 Article

The inter- and intrarater reliability and agreement for field-based assessment of scapular control, shoulder range of motion, and shoulder isometric strength in elite adolescent athletes

Journal

PHYSICAL THERAPY IN SPORT
Volume 32, Issue -, Pages 212-220

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ptsp.2018.04.005

Keywords

Handball; Hand-held dynamometer; Inclinometer; Scapular dyskinesis

Funding

  1. Danish Rheumatism Association
  2. Chiroform

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: To investigate the intra- and interrater reliability and agreement for field-based assessment of scapular control, shoulder range of motion (ROM), and shoulder isometric strength in elite youth athletes. Design: Test-retest reliability and agreement study. Setting: Eight blinded raters (two for each assessment) assessed players on field during two testing sessions separated by one week. Participants: 162 elite youth handball players with or without a history of previous shoulder pain within the preceding six months. Main outcome measures: Kappa (kappa) and prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK) coefficients for scapular control reliability, and 95% limits of agreement (LOA) for ROM and strength agreement. Results: Scapular control demonstrated substantial to almost perfect reliability (k 0.67 to 0.84, PABAK from 0.68 to 0.88). Mean strength values ranged from 0.9 N/kg to 1.6 N/kg, and LOAs ranged from -0.7 N/ kg to 0.8 N/kg. Rotational strength revealed additionally systematic bias between and within rater. No or acceptable systematic bias were evident for ROM and abduction strength measures. Mean values and LOAs for ROM ranged between 39.9 degrees to 52.3 degrees, and from -12.6 degrees to 9.9 degrees, respectively. Conclusions: Scapular control and ROM can be assessed on the field with acceptable reliability. The threshold for reliable measurements of isometric strength using handheld-dynamometers is high. (C) 2018 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available