Reliability and Validity of Ankle Muscle Strength Testing Using the ISOTIB Device.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Sean Drew, Sean A Horan, Steven Duhig
{"title":"Reliability and Validity of Ankle Muscle Strength Testing Using the ISOTIB Device.","authors":"Sean Drew, Sean A Horan, Steven Duhig","doi":"10.1002/jfa2.70098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>One repetition maximum (1RM) testing is recognised as a reliable and valid method for determining maximum muscle strength. However, there are limited reports in the literature for measuring maximum ankle strength using free-weight methods. The aim of this study was to determine the test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of a novel free-weight device (ISOTIB) used to measure ankle strength.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fifteen healthy, recreationally active, adults (male = 10, female = 5, age = 29.7 ± 4.4 years) volunteered for the study, attending two sessions 1 week apart. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC<sub>(3,1)</sub>) and Bland-Altman method. Concurrent validity was examined by comparing 1RM ankle strength and normalised muscle activity using surface electromyography (sEMG) during dorsiflexion, inversion, and eversion movements performed with the ISOTIB device and an isokinetic dynamometer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The ISOTIB exhibited excellent test-retest reliability for maximal dorsiflexion (ICC<sub>(3,1)</sub> = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.977-0.997), inversion (ICC<sub>(3,1)</sub> = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.970-0.997), and eversion (ICC<sub>(3,1)</sub> = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.920-0.991) strength. Concurrent validity was confirmed, with high positive correlations for maximal dorsiflexion (r = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.72-0.97) p < 0.001), inversion (r = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.24-0.88) p < 0.007), and eversion (r = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.64-0.96) p < 0.001) strength. sEMG results supported concurrent validity with comparable activity in the tibialis anterior, peroneus longus, and peroneus brevis muscles.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The ISOTIB demonstrated excellent reliability and validity, suggesting it is a viable tool for assessing maximal ankle strength. The ISOTIB offers a practical alternative to current methods, which are typically expensive and utilise large immovable devices.</p>","PeriodicalId":49164,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foot and Ankle Research","volume":"19 2","pages":"e70098"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13065896/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Foot and Ankle Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jfa2.70098","RegionNum":3,"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

Introduction: One repetition maximum (1RM) testing is recognised as a reliable and valid method for determining maximum muscle strength. However, there are limited reports in the literature for measuring maximum ankle strength using free-weight methods. The aim of this study was to determine the test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of a novel free-weight device (ISOTIB) used to measure ankle strength.

Methods: Fifteen healthy, recreationally active, adults (male = 10, female = 5, age = 29.7 ± 4.4 years) volunteered for the study, attending two sessions 1 week apart. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC(3,1)) and Bland-Altman method. Concurrent validity was examined by comparing 1RM ankle strength and normalised muscle activity using surface electromyography (sEMG) during dorsiflexion, inversion, and eversion movements performed with the ISOTIB device and an isokinetic dynamometer.

Results: The ISOTIB exhibited excellent test-retest reliability for maximal dorsiflexion (ICC(3,1) = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.977-0.997), inversion (ICC(3,1) = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.970-0.997), and eversion (ICC(3,1) = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.920-0.991) strength. Concurrent validity was confirmed, with high positive correlations for maximal dorsiflexion (r = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.72-0.97) p < 0.001), inversion (r = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.24-0.88) p < 0.007), and eversion (r = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.64-0.96) p < 0.001) strength. sEMG results supported concurrent validity with comparable activity in the tibialis anterior, peroneus longus, and peroneus brevis muscles.

Conclusion: The ISOTIB demonstrated excellent reliability and validity, suggesting it is a viable tool for assessing maximal ankle strength. The ISOTIB offers a practical alternative to current methods, which are typically expensive and utilise large immovable devices.

利用ISOTIB装置进行踝关节肌力测试的信度和效度。
一次最大重复(1RM)测试被认为是确定最大肌肉力量的可靠和有效的方法。然而,文献中关于使用自由重量法测量踝关节最大力量的报道有限。本研究的目的是确定一种用于测量踝关节力量的新型自由重量装置(ISOTIB)的重测信度和并发效度。方法:15名健康、有娱乐活动的成年人(男10人,女5人,年龄29.7±4.4岁)自愿参加研究,每隔1周参加两次。采用类内相关系数(ICC(3,1))和Bland-Altman方法评估信度。使用ISOTIB装置和等速测功机进行背屈、倒置和外翻运动时,通过使用表面肌电图(sEMG)比较1RM踝关节力量和标准化肌肉活动来检查并发有效性。结果:ISOTIB对最大背屈(ICC(3,1) = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.977-0.997)、倒置(ICC(3,1) = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.970-0.997)和外翻(ICC(3,1) = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.920-0.991)强度表现出极好的重测信度。同时效度被证实,与最大背屈度高度正相关(r = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.72-0.97)。结论:ISOTIB具有出色的信度和效度,表明ISOTIB是评估最大踝关节力量的可行工具。ISOTIB提供了一种实用的替代方法,目前的方法通常是昂贵的,并且使用大型不可移动的设备。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
10.30%
发文量
83
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, the official journal of the Australian Podiatry Association and The College of Podiatry (UK), is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of policy, organisation, delivery and clinical practice related to the assessment, diagnosis, prevention and management of foot and ankle disorders. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research covers a wide range of clinical subject areas, including diabetology, paediatrics, sports medicine, gerontology and geriatrics, foot surgery, physical therapy, dermatology, wound management, radiology, biomechanics and bioengineering, orthotics and prosthetics, as well the broad areas of epidemiology, policy, organisation and delivery of services related to foot and ankle care. The journal encourages submissions from all health professionals who manage lower limb conditions, including podiatrists, nurses, physical therapists and physiotherapists, orthopaedists, manual therapists, medical specialists and general medical practitioners, as well as health service researchers concerned with foot and ankle care. The Australian Podiatry Association and the College of Podiatry (UK) have reserve funds to cover the article-processing charge for manuscripts submitted by its members. Society members can email the appropriate contact at Australian Podiatry Association or The College of Podiatry to obtain the corresponding code to enter on submission.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书