Sebastian Keller Rolsted , Kasper Dyrmose Andersen , Gustav Dandanell , Christian Have Dall , Camilla Kampp Zilmer , Kasper Bülow , Morten Tange Kristensen
{"title":"两种电子测力计测量手握力的比较。","authors":"Sebastian Keller Rolsted , Kasper Dyrmose Andersen , Gustav Dandanell , Christian Have Dall , Camilla Kampp Zilmer , Kasper Bülow , Morten Tange Kristensen","doi":"10.1016/j.hansur.2024.101692","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Handgrip strength (HGS) is a strong predictor and easily applicable assessment, indicating a person's physical condition and health. However, many dynamometers are available; therefore, it is essential to ensure that the results of HGS testing using different dynamometers can be used interchangeably. The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the inter-instrument agreement and criterion validity of the Baseline BIMS Digital Grip Dynamometer in comparison with the Jamar electronic dynamometer (Jamar+).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Seventy participants, aged between 23–88 (five men and five women in each decade from 20 to 80+), performed three attempts with each dynamometer (30-sec break between attempts) in a randomized order and separated with a 5-minute break between dynamometers. Intraclass correlation coefficient (3.1), standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change were used for comparison of the strongest and average strength measured with dynamometers. Jamar+ and Baseline BIMS Digital Grip Dynamometer were new dynamometers and considered calibrated by the manufacturer.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The overall Intraclass correlation coefficient was excellent (0.98). An average (SD) difference of 0.68 (2.2) kg (p = 0.04) was seen for the comparison of the strongest attempt for Baseline BIMS minus Jamar+, Correspondingly, for the average of three attempts, it was 0.37 (2.29, p = 0.2) kg. The standard error of measurement (%) and minimal detectable change (%) of the strongest attempt was 1.64 kg (4.2%) and 3.55 kg (9.0%), respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Findings indicate low measurement error with high agreement and criterion validity for the comparison of Baseline BIMS Digital Grip Dynamometer and Jamar+ and that results of the two dynamometers can be used interchangeably.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54301,"journal":{"name":"Hand Surgery & Rehabilitation","volume":"43 3","pages":"Article 101692"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468122924000690/pdfft?md5=6e75f31cc4b651dc586258216672a288&pid=1-s2.0-S2468122924000690-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of two electronic dynamometers for measuring handgrip strength\",\"authors\":\"Sebastian Keller Rolsted , Kasper Dyrmose Andersen , Gustav Dandanell , Christian Have Dall , Camilla Kampp Zilmer , Kasper Bülow , Morten Tange Kristensen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hansur.2024.101692\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Handgrip strength (HGS) is a strong predictor and easily applicable assessment, indicating a person's physical condition and health. However, many dynamometers are available; therefore, it is essential to ensure that the results of HGS testing using different dynamometers can be used interchangeably. The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the inter-instrument agreement and criterion validity of the Baseline BIMS Digital Grip Dynamometer in comparison with the Jamar electronic dynamometer (Jamar+).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Seventy participants, aged between 23–88 (five men and five women in each decade from 20 to 80+), performed three attempts with each dynamometer (30-sec break between attempts) in a randomized order and separated with a 5-minute break between dynamometers. Intraclass correlation coefficient (3.1), standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change were used for comparison of the strongest and average strength measured with dynamometers. Jamar+ and Baseline BIMS Digital Grip Dynamometer were new dynamometers and considered calibrated by the manufacturer.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The overall Intraclass correlation coefficient was excellent (0.98). An average (SD) difference of 0.68 (2.2) kg (p = 0.04) was seen for the comparison of the strongest attempt for Baseline BIMS minus Jamar+, Correspondingly, for the average of three attempts, it was 0.37 (2.29, p = 0.2) kg. The standard error of measurement (%) and minimal detectable change (%) of the strongest attempt was 1.64 kg (4.2%) and 3.55 kg (9.0%), respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Findings indicate low measurement error with high agreement and criterion validity for the comparison of Baseline BIMS Digital Grip Dynamometer and Jamar+ and that results of the two dynamometers can be used interchangeably.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54301,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hand Surgery & Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\"43 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 101692\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468122924000690/pdfft?md5=6e75f31cc4b651dc586258216672a288&pid=1-s2.0-S2468122924000690-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hand Surgery & Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468122924000690\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hand Surgery & Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468122924000690","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of two electronic dynamometers for measuring handgrip strength
Introduction
Handgrip strength (HGS) is a strong predictor and easily applicable assessment, indicating a person's physical condition and health. However, many dynamometers are available; therefore, it is essential to ensure that the results of HGS testing using different dynamometers can be used interchangeably. The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the inter-instrument agreement and criterion validity of the Baseline BIMS Digital Grip Dynamometer in comparison with the Jamar electronic dynamometer (Jamar+).
Methods
Seventy participants, aged between 23–88 (five men and five women in each decade from 20 to 80+), performed three attempts with each dynamometer (30-sec break between attempts) in a randomized order and separated with a 5-minute break between dynamometers. Intraclass correlation coefficient (3.1), standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change were used for comparison of the strongest and average strength measured with dynamometers. Jamar+ and Baseline BIMS Digital Grip Dynamometer were new dynamometers and considered calibrated by the manufacturer.
Results
The overall Intraclass correlation coefficient was excellent (0.98). An average (SD) difference of 0.68 (2.2) kg (p = 0.04) was seen for the comparison of the strongest attempt for Baseline BIMS minus Jamar+, Correspondingly, for the average of three attempts, it was 0.37 (2.29, p = 0.2) kg. The standard error of measurement (%) and minimal detectable change (%) of the strongest attempt was 1.64 kg (4.2%) and 3.55 kg (9.0%), respectively.
Conclusions
Findings indicate low measurement error with high agreement and criterion validity for the comparison of Baseline BIMS Digital Grip Dynamometer and Jamar+ and that results of the two dynamometers can be used interchangeably.
期刊介绍:
As the official publication of the French, Belgian and Swiss Societies for Surgery of the Hand, as well as of the French Society of Rehabilitation of the Hand & Upper Limb, ''Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation'' - formerly named "Chirurgie de la Main" - publishes original articles, literature reviews, technical notes, and clinical cases. It is indexed in the main international databases (including Medline). Initially a platform for French-speaking hand surgeons, the journal will now publish its articles in English to disseminate its author''s scientific findings more widely. The journal also includes a biannual supplement in French, the monograph of the French Society for Surgery of the Hand, where comprehensive reviews in the fields of hand, peripheral nerve and upper limb surgery are presented.
Organe officiel de la Société française de chirurgie de la main, de la Société française de Rééducation de la main (SFRM-GEMMSOR), de la Société suisse de chirurgie de la main et du Belgian Hand Group, indexée dans les grandes bases de données internationales (Medline, Embase, Pascal, Scopus), Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation - anciennement titrée Chirurgie de la main - publie des articles originaux, des revues de la littérature, des notes techniques, des cas clinique. Initialement plateforme d''expression francophone de la spécialité, la revue s''oriente désormais vers l''anglais pour devenir une référence scientifique et de formation de la spécialité en France et en Europe. Avec 6 publications en anglais par an, la revue comprend également un supplément biannuel, la monographie du GEM, où sont présentées en français, des mises au point complètes dans les domaines de la chirurgie de la main, des nerfs périphériques et du membre supérieur.