两种电子测力计测量手握力的比较。

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
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 ,&nbsp;Kasper Dyrmose Andersen ,&nbsp;Gustav Dandanell ,&nbsp;Christian Have Dall ,&nbsp;Camilla Kampp Zilmer ,&nbsp;Kasper Bülow ,&nbsp;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 ,&nbsp;Kasper Dyrmose Andersen ,&nbsp;Gustav Dandanell ,&nbsp;Christian Have Dall ,&nbsp;Camilla Kampp Zilmer ,&nbsp;Kasper Bülow ,&nbsp;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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介手握力(HGS)是一个很强的预测指标,也是一个很容易应用的评估指标,可以显示一个人的身体状况和健康状况。然而,目前市面上有许多测力计,因此必须确保使用不同测力计进行的 HGS 测试结果可以互换使用。本研究的主要目的是调查 Baseline BIMS 数字握力计与 Jamar 电子测力计(Jamar+)的器间一致性和标准有效性:70名年龄在23-88岁之间的参与者(从20岁到80岁以上,每个年龄段有5名男性和5名女性),按照随机顺序使用每种测力计进行3次尝试(每次尝试之间休息30秒),测力计之间休息5分钟。采用类内相关系数(3.1)、测量标准误差和最小可检测变化来比较测力计测得的最强和平均力量。Jamar+ 和 Baseline BIMS 数字握力计是新的测力计,由制造商校准:结果:总体类内相关系数非常好(0.98)。基线 BIMS 与 Jamar+ 相比,最强一次尝试的平均(标清)差异为 0.68 (2.2) kg (p = 0.04),而三次尝试的平均差异为 0.37 (2.29, p = 0.2) kg。最强尝试的测量标准误差(%)和最小可检测变化(%)分别为 1.64 千克(4.2%)和 3.55 千克(9.0%):研究结果表明,基线 BIMS 数字握力计和 Jamar+ 的测量误差小,一致性和标准有效性高,两种测力计的结果可以互换使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
27.30%
发文量
0
审稿时长
49 days
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.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信