Tais S. Martins PT , Carina F. Pinheiro-Araujo PT, PhD , Camila Gorla PT, MSc , Lidiane L. Florencio PT, PhD , Jaqueline Martins PT, MSc , César Fernández-de-las-Peñas PT, PhD , Anamaria S. Oliveira PT, PhD , Débora Bevilaqua-Grossi PT, PhD
{"title":"无症状个体用固定和便携式测功机评估颈部力量:相关性、并发有效性和一致性","authors":"Tais S. Martins PT , Carina F. Pinheiro-Araujo PT, PhD , Camila Gorla PT, MSc , Lidiane L. Florencio PT, PhD , Jaqueline Martins PT, MSc , César Fernández-de-las-Peñas PT, PhD , Anamaria S. Oliveira PT, PhD , Débora Bevilaqua-Grossi PT, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2022.10.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The purpose of this study was to assess the correlation, concurrent validity, and agreement between the isometric cervical force measurements obtained with fixed and portable dynamometers in asymptomatic individuals.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Fifty asymptomatic individuals performed 3 maximal isometric contractions<span><span> for flexion, extension, and lateral flexion of the cervical spine using fixed and portable dynamometers. The correlation and concurrent validity for the measurements of the portable and fixed dynamometers were analyzed using Spearman's </span>correlation coefficient and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), respectively. The agreement between the force values of the portable and fixed dynamometers was measured using the Bland-Altman method.</span></p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Isometric cervical force measurements obtained with the fixed dynamometer and portable dynamometer showed a moderately to highly significant correlation for flexion (r<sub>s</sub> = 0.74), extension (r<sub>s</sub> = 0.82), right lateral flexion (r<sub>s</sub> = 0.74), and left lateral flexion (r<sub>s</sub> = 0.68). The concurrent validity was moderate to good for all measurements (ICC<sub>2,3</sub> = 0.67-0.80). The fixed and portable dynamometers did not agree, with a significant mean difference between the methods of 2.8 kgf (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-3.4 kgf) for cervical flexion, 5.3 kgf (95% CI, 4.2-6.4 kgf) for extension, and 9.1 kgf (95% CI, 0.4-2.1 kgf) for left lateral flexion. The limits of agreement were broad for all movements, with errors that varied between 61% and 77% of the mean force obtained with the fixed dynamometer.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The neck strength measurements obtained with the fixed and portable dynamometers demonstrated high to moderate correlation and had moderate to good comparability for asymptomatic participants. However, they did not agree in that the 2 methods did not provide equivalent measurements, and, therefore, based on these findings, the same equipment should always be used when reassessing an individual.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neck Strength Evaluated With Fixed and Portable Dynamometers in Asymptomatic Individuals: Correlation, Concurrent Validity, and Agreement\",\"authors\":\"Tais S. Martins PT , Carina F. Pinheiro-Araujo PT, PhD , Camila Gorla PT, MSc , Lidiane L. Florencio PT, PhD , Jaqueline Martins PT, MSc , César Fernández-de-las-Peñas PT, PhD , Anamaria S. Oliveira PT, PhD , Débora Bevilaqua-Grossi PT, PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jmpt.2022.10.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The purpose of this study was to assess the correlation, concurrent validity, and agreement between the isometric cervical force measurements obtained with fixed and portable dynamometers in asymptomatic individuals.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Fifty asymptomatic individuals performed 3 maximal isometric contractions<span><span> for flexion, extension, and lateral flexion of the cervical spine using fixed and portable dynamometers. The correlation and concurrent validity for the measurements of the portable and fixed dynamometers were analyzed using Spearman's </span>correlation coefficient and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), respectively. The agreement between the force values of the portable and fixed dynamometers was measured using the Bland-Altman method.</span></p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Isometric cervical force measurements obtained with the fixed dynamometer and portable dynamometer showed a moderately to highly significant correlation for flexion (r<sub>s</sub> = 0.74), extension (r<sub>s</sub> = 0.82), right lateral flexion (r<sub>s</sub> = 0.74), and left lateral flexion (r<sub>s</sub> = 0.68). The concurrent validity was moderate to good for all measurements (ICC<sub>2,3</sub> = 0.67-0.80). The fixed and portable dynamometers did not agree, with a significant mean difference between the methods of 2.8 kgf (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-3.4 kgf) for cervical flexion, 5.3 kgf (95% CI, 4.2-6.4 kgf) for extension, and 9.1 kgf (95% CI, 0.4-2.1 kgf) for left lateral flexion. The limits of agreement were broad for all movements, with errors that varied between 61% and 77% of the mean force obtained with the fixed dynamometer.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The neck strength measurements obtained with the fixed and portable dynamometers demonstrated high to moderate correlation and had moderate to good comparability for asymptomatic participants. However, they did not agree in that the 2 methods did not provide equivalent measurements, and, therefore, based on these findings, the same equipment should always be used when reassessing an individual.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16132,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161475422001385\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161475422001385","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Neck Strength Evaluated With Fixed and Portable Dynamometers in Asymptomatic Individuals: Correlation, Concurrent Validity, and Agreement
Objective
The purpose of this study was to assess the correlation, concurrent validity, and agreement between the isometric cervical force measurements obtained with fixed and portable dynamometers in asymptomatic individuals.
Methods
Fifty asymptomatic individuals performed 3 maximal isometric contractions for flexion, extension, and lateral flexion of the cervical spine using fixed and portable dynamometers. The correlation and concurrent validity for the measurements of the portable and fixed dynamometers were analyzed using Spearman's correlation coefficient and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), respectively. The agreement between the force values of the portable and fixed dynamometers was measured using the Bland-Altman method.
Results
Isometric cervical force measurements obtained with the fixed dynamometer and portable dynamometer showed a moderately to highly significant correlation for flexion (rs = 0.74), extension (rs = 0.82), right lateral flexion (rs = 0.74), and left lateral flexion (rs = 0.68). The concurrent validity was moderate to good for all measurements (ICC2,3 = 0.67-0.80). The fixed and portable dynamometers did not agree, with a significant mean difference between the methods of 2.8 kgf (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-3.4 kgf) for cervical flexion, 5.3 kgf (95% CI, 4.2-6.4 kgf) for extension, and 9.1 kgf (95% CI, 0.4-2.1 kgf) for left lateral flexion. The limits of agreement were broad for all movements, with errors that varied between 61% and 77% of the mean force obtained with the fixed dynamometer.
Conclusion
The neck strength measurements obtained with the fixed and portable dynamometers demonstrated high to moderate correlation and had moderate to good comparability for asymptomatic participants. However, they did not agree in that the 2 methods did not provide equivalent measurements, and, therefore, based on these findings, the same equipment should always be used when reassessing an individual.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics (JMPT) is an international and interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the advancement of conservative health care principles and practices. The JMPT is the premier biomedical publication in the chiropractic profession and publishes peer reviewed, research articles and the Journal''s editorial board includes leading researchers from around the world.
The Journal publishes original primary research and review articles of the highest quality in relevant topic areas. The JMPT addresses practitioners and researchers needs by adding to their clinical and basic science knowledge and by informing them about relevant issues that influence health care practices.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
