Assessing Shoulder Proprioceptive Sense of Force: Hand-Held Dynamometer Reliability and Comparison with Isokinetic Protocols.

IF 2.1 Q3 SPORT SCIENCES International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy Pub Date : 2025-03-02 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.26603/001c.129585
Xavier Amen, Jean-Sébastien Roy, Stéphane Baudry, Dominique Mouraux, Joachim Van Cant
{"title":"Assessing Shoulder Proprioceptive Sense of Force: Hand-Held Dynamometer Reliability and Comparison with Isokinetic Protocols.","authors":"Xavier Amen, Jean-Sébastien Roy, Stéphane Baudry, Dominique Mouraux, Joachim Van Cant","doi":"10.26603/001c.129585","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Proprioception is crucial for shoulder stability, yet clinical methods for assessing all aspects, particularly the sense of force (SOF) -the ability to perceive, interpret, and reproduce force at a joint-are limited. The purpose of this study was to test a new SOF protocol with a handheld dynamometer (HHD) and examine its agreement with an isokinetic dynamometer (IKD), as well as its reliability and the effect of contraction intensity.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional measurement study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fifty-one healthy participants were assessed for SOF using an Isokinetic dynamometer (IKD) and a HHD to evaluate the agreement between the two methods. Of the initial sample, 25 participants completed a second session with the HHD, enabling the evaluation of the protocol's reliability exclusively with this device. Error score were also compared between three different contraction intensities: 10%, 30% and 50% of maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC). Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC) for intra-rater (within-day and between-day) and inter-rater (within-day) reliability while agreement between the tools was assessed using regression line method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Agreement between devices was low with a poor correlation observed between measurements. The HHD SOF protocol showed low to moderate reliability for intra-rater between-day assessments, with ICCs from 0.44 to 0.64. The absolute reliability MDC95 ranged from 12% to 42%. Inter-rater within-day reliability was low, with ICCs from 0.007 to 0.43. Significant differences in error scores were observed between the HHD and IKD at 30% and 50% MVIC, and higher error scores were noted at Target 10% MVIC compared to 30% and 50%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The SOF protocol using HHD demonstrates moderate reliability but low inter-rater reliability. Different tools yield varying results, with force intensity impacting SOF error scores, while rotation does not.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>2b.</p>","PeriodicalId":47892,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy","volume":"20 3","pages":"400-409"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11872536/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26603/001c.129585","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Proprioception is crucial for shoulder stability, yet clinical methods for assessing all aspects, particularly the sense of force (SOF) -the ability to perceive, interpret, and reproduce force at a joint-are limited. The purpose of this study was to test a new SOF protocol with a handheld dynamometer (HHD) and examine its agreement with an isokinetic dynamometer (IKD), as well as its reliability and the effect of contraction intensity.

Design: Cross-sectional measurement study.

Methods: Fifty-one healthy participants were assessed for SOF using an Isokinetic dynamometer (IKD) and a HHD to evaluate the agreement between the two methods. Of the initial sample, 25 participants completed a second session with the HHD, enabling the evaluation of the protocol's reliability exclusively with this device. Error score were also compared between three different contraction intensities: 10%, 30% and 50% of maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC). Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC) for intra-rater (within-day and between-day) and inter-rater (within-day) reliability while agreement between the tools was assessed using regression line method.

Results: Agreement between devices was low with a poor correlation observed between measurements. The HHD SOF protocol showed low to moderate reliability for intra-rater between-day assessments, with ICCs from 0.44 to 0.64. The absolute reliability MDC95 ranged from 12% to 42%. Inter-rater within-day reliability was low, with ICCs from 0.007 to 0.43. Significant differences in error scores were observed between the HHD and IKD at 30% and 50% MVIC, and higher error scores were noted at Target 10% MVIC compared to 30% and 50%.

Conclusions: The SOF protocol using HHD demonstrates moderate reliability but low inter-rater reliability. Different tools yield varying results, with force intensity impacting SOF error scores, while rotation does not.

Level of evidence: 2b.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估肩部本体感觉力:手持测功机的可靠性和与等速运动方案的比较。
背景:本体感觉对肩部稳定性至关重要,然而临床评估各个方面的方法,特别是力感(SOF)——感知、解释和再现关节力的能力是有限的。本研究的目的是用手持式测功仪(HHD)测试一种新的SOF方案,并检查其与等速测功仪(IKD)的一致性,以及其可靠性和收缩强度的影响。设计:横断面测量研究。方法:采用等速测功仪(IKD)和HHD对51名健康受试者进行软骨度评估,评价两种方法的一致性。在最初的样本中,25名参与者使用HHD完成了第二次会话,从而能够仅使用该设备评估协议的可靠性。误差评分也比较了三种不同的收缩强度:10%,30%和50%的最大自愿等距收缩(MVIC)。类内相关系数(ICCs)、测量标准误差(SEM)和最小可检测变化(MDC)的内部(日内和日内)和内部(日内)可靠性,同时使用回归线方法评估工具之间的一致性。结果:设备之间的一致性很低,测量结果之间的相关性很差。HHD SOF方案在日间评估中显示出低至中等的可靠性,ICCs为0.44至0.64。MDC95的绝对信度范围为12% ~ 42%。评分者间的日内信度较低,ICCs为0.007 ~ 0.43。HHD和IKD在30%和50% MVIC时的错误评分有显著差异,在Target 10% MVIC时的错误评分高于30%和50% MVIC。结论:采用HHD的SOF方案具有中等信度,但评分间信度较低。不同的工具会产生不同的结果,作用力强度会影响SOF误差评分,而旋转不会。证据等级:2b。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
124
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
A Multimodal Approach for the Management of Moderate Hip Osteoarthritis in A Runner: A Case Report. Current Concepts in Hip and Core Assessment to Reduce the Risk of ACL Injury. Evaluation of Reactive Strength Index During Single-Limb Vertical Jumps and Isokinetic Strength Five to Eight Months After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction. Total Knee Arthroplasty Rehabilitation Strategies for Avoiding Arthrofibrosis and Other Complications with the Goal of Return to Recreational Activities and Active Lifestyle. Perceptions of Biomechanical Devices in Collegiate Baseball Pitchers and Training Staff: A Qualitative Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1