Can Clinicians Trust Objective Measures of Hip Muscle Strength From Portable Dynamometers? A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis and Evidence Gap Map of 107 Studies of Reliability and Criterion Validity Using the COSMIN Methodology.

IF 6 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy Pub Date : 2023-11-01 DOI:10.2519/jospt.2023.12045
Marina C Waiteman, Micah C Garcia, Ronaldo V Briani, Grant Norte, Neal R Glaviano, Fábio M De Azevedo, David M Bazett-Jones
{"title":"Can Clinicians Trust Objective Measures of Hip Muscle Strength From Portable Dynamometers? A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis and Evidence Gap Map of 107 Studies of Reliability and Criterion Validity Using the COSMIN Methodology.","authors":"Marina C Waiteman,&nbsp;Micah C Garcia,&nbsp;Ronaldo V Briani,&nbsp;Grant Norte,&nbsp;Neal R Glaviano,&nbsp;Fábio M De Azevedo,&nbsp;David M Bazett-Jones","doi":"10.2519/jospt.2023.12045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>OBJECTIVE:</b> To summarize the evidence on reliability and criterion validity of hip muscle strength testing using portable dynamometers. <b>DESIGN:</b> Systematic review with meta-analysis. <b>LITERATURE SEARCH:</b> Five databases were searched from inception to March 2023. <b>STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA:</b> We included studies investigating reliability or criterion validity of hip flexor, extensor, abductor, adductor, or internal/external rotator strength testing with portable dynamometers in injury-free individuals or those with pelvic/lower limb musculoskeletal disorders. <b>DATA SYNTHESIS:</b> We performed meta-analyses for each muscle group, position, and method of fixation. We rated pooled results as sufficient (>75% of studies with correlations ≥0.70), insufficient (>75% of studies with correlations <0.70), or inconsistent (sufficient/insufficient results). We assessed the quality of evidence, created evidence gap maps, and made clinical recommendations. <b>RESULTS:</b> We included a total of 107 studies (reliability 103, validity 14). The intrarater and interrater reliability for hip muscle strength testing across different positions and methods of fixation was sufficient (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.78-0.96) with low- to high-quality evidence. Criterion validity was less investigated and mostly inconsistent (very low-to moderate-quality evidence) with a wide range of correlations (r = 0.40-0.93). <b>CONCLUSION:</b> Hip muscle strength testing using portable dynamometers is reliable. The use of portable dynamometers as clinical surrogates for measuring strength using an isokinetic dynamometer requires further investigation. Clinicians testing hip muscle strength with portable dynamometers should use external fixation seated for hip flexors, prone or supine for hip extensors, side-lying or supine for abductors and adductors, and prone and seated for internal and external rotators. <i>J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(11):655-672. Epub 3 October 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.12045</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":50099,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"655-672"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2023.12045","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the evidence on reliability and criterion validity of hip muscle strength testing using portable dynamometers. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. LITERATURE SEARCH: Five databases were searched from inception to March 2023. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies investigating reliability or criterion validity of hip flexor, extensor, abductor, adductor, or internal/external rotator strength testing with portable dynamometers in injury-free individuals or those with pelvic/lower limb musculoskeletal disorders. DATA SYNTHESIS: We performed meta-analyses for each muscle group, position, and method of fixation. We rated pooled results as sufficient (>75% of studies with correlations ≥0.70), insufficient (>75% of studies with correlations <0.70), or inconsistent (sufficient/insufficient results). We assessed the quality of evidence, created evidence gap maps, and made clinical recommendations. RESULTS: We included a total of 107 studies (reliability 103, validity 14). The intrarater and interrater reliability for hip muscle strength testing across different positions and methods of fixation was sufficient (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.78-0.96) with low- to high-quality evidence. Criterion validity was less investigated and mostly inconsistent (very low-to moderate-quality evidence) with a wide range of correlations (r = 0.40-0.93). CONCLUSION: Hip muscle strength testing using portable dynamometers is reliable. The use of portable dynamometers as clinical surrogates for measuring strength using an isokinetic dynamometer requires further investigation. Clinicians testing hip muscle strength with portable dynamometers should use external fixation seated for hip flexors, prone or supine for hip extensors, side-lying or supine for abductors and adductors, and prone and seated for internal and external rotators. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(11):655-672. Epub 3 October 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.12045.

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
临床医生能相信便携式测功仪对髋部肌肉力量的客观测量吗?使用COSMIN方法对107项可靠性和标准有效性研究进行荟萃分析和证据差距图的系统综述。
目的:总结便携式测功仪髋关节肌力测试的信度和标准有效性证据。设计:荟萃分析系统综述。文献检索:从成立到2023年3月,共检索了五个数据库。研究选择标准:我们纳入了对无损伤个体或骨盆/下肢肌肉骨骼疾病患者使用便携式测功仪进行髋屈肌、伸肌、外展肌、内收肌或内/外旋转肌强度测试的可靠性或标准有效性进行调查的研究。数据综合:我们对每个肌肉组、位置和固定方法进行了荟萃分析。我们将汇总结果评定为充分(相关性≥0.70的研究中>75%)、不足(相关性研究中>75%)。结果:我们共纳入107项研究(可靠性103,有效性14)。不同固定位置和方法的髋关节肌力测试的评分者内和评分者间可靠性足够(组内相关系数[ICC]=0.78-0.96),证据质量从低到高。标准的有效性研究较少,大多不一致(证据质量很低至中等),相关性范围很广(r=0.40-0.93)。结论:使用便携式测功仪进行髋关节肌力测试是可靠的。使用便携式测功机作为使用等速测功机测量强度的临床替代品需要进一步研究。使用便携式测功仪测试髋肌肉力量的临床医生应使用髋屈肌坐式外固定,髋伸肌俯卧或仰卧,外展肌和内收肌侧卧或仰卧,内旋肌和外旋肌俯卧和坐式。
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
8.00
自引率
4.90%
发文量
101
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy® (JOSPT®) publishes scientifically rigorous, clinically relevant content for physical therapists and others in the health care community to advance musculoskeletal and sports-related practice globally. To this end, JOSPT features the latest evidence-based research and clinical cases in musculoskeletal health, injury, and rehabilitation, including physical therapy, orthopaedics, sports medicine, and biomechanics. With an impact factor of 3.090, JOSPT is among the highest ranked physical therapy journals in Clarivate Analytics''s Journal Citation Reports, Science Edition (2017). JOSPT stands eighth of 65 journals in the category of rehabilitation, twelfth of 77 journals in orthopedics, and fourteenth of 81 journals in sport sciences. JOSPT''s 5-year impact factor is 4.061.
期刊最新文献
Concussion Incidence by Type of Sport: Differences by Sex, Age Groups, Type of Session, and Level of Play An Overview of Systematic Reviews With Meta-analysis. Differential Effects of Quadriceps and Hip Muscle Exercises for Patellofemoral Pain: A Secondary Effect Modifier Analysis of a Randomized Trial. Improvements in Forward Bending Are Related to Improvements in Pain and Disability During Cognitive Functional Therapy for People With Chronic Low Back Pain. The Influence of "Labels" for Neck Pain on Recovery Expectations Following a Motor Vehicle Crash: An Online-Randomized Vignette-Based Experiment. Encouraging New Moms to Move More-Are We Missing the Mark? A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Exercise Interventions on Postpartum Physical Activity Levels and Cardiorespiratory Fitness.
×
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:481959085
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