三种不同的握力计(Jamar, Jamar Plus+和Biodex)在健康青年中的重测信度和并发效度。

IF 0.9 Q4 REHABILITATION
Gabriel Morais Xavier Dos Santos, Leonardo Dutra de Salvo Mauad, Heloísa Corrêa Bueno Nardim, Mariana Ferreira Silva, Flávia Pessoni Faleiros Macedo, Gabriela Rezende, Raquel Metzker Mendes Sugano, Elaine Caldeira de Oliveira Guirro, Marisa de Cássia Registro Fonseca
{"title":"三种不同的握力计(Jamar, Jamar Plus+和Biodex)在健康青年中的重测信度和并发效度。","authors":"Gabriel Morais Xavier Dos Santos, Leonardo Dutra de Salvo Mauad, Heloísa Corrêa Bueno Nardim, Mariana Ferreira Silva, Flávia Pessoni Faleiros Macedo, Gabriela Rezende, Raquel Metzker Mendes Sugano, Elaine Caldeira de Oliveira Guirro, Marisa de Cássia Registro Fonseca","doi":"10.1177/17589983251352104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Handgrip strength (HGS) is a key indicator of upper limb function and overall health. While the Jamar dynamometer is considered the gold standard for HGS assessment, alternatives like the Jamar Plus+ and Biodex have emerged, though their reliability and agreement remain underexplored.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the test-retest reliability and agreement of the Jamar, Jamar Plus+, and Biodex dynamometers in healthy young adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This exploratory cross-sectional study included 35 participants (22 females, 13 males; mean age 23.4 years). HGS was assessed using the three devices, following standardised protocols, with retest after 7 days. Reliability was analysed using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), Standard Error of Measurement (SEM), and Minimal Detectable Change (MDC). Agreement was examined through Bland-Altman plots and Limits of Agreement (LoA %).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Jamar and Jamar Plus+ showed excellent reliability (ICC = 0.96-0.98) and strong agreement, with narrow LoA percentages and low measurement error, especially on the non-dominant hand. In contrast, comparisons involving the Biodex revealed wider LoA (up to ±73%) and higher SEM and MDC values, indicating lower agreement with handheld devices. These discrepancies are likely due to differences in measurement principles, hand positioning, and unit conversion. Male participants showed significantly higher grip strength across all instruments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Jamar and Jamar Plus+ can be used interchangeably. The Biodex may be considered when appropriate adjustments are made, though its agreement with handheld dynamometers is limited. These findings highlight the need for standardised protocols and further research to ensure consistent and reliable HGS assessment across devices.</p>","PeriodicalId":43971,"journal":{"name":"Hand Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"17589983251352104"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12228645/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of three different handgrip dynamometers (Jamar, Jamar Plus+ and Biodex) in healthy young adults.\",\"authors\":\"Gabriel Morais Xavier Dos Santos, Leonardo Dutra de Salvo Mauad, Heloísa Corrêa Bueno Nardim, Mariana Ferreira Silva, Flávia Pessoni Faleiros Macedo, Gabriela Rezende, Raquel Metzker Mendes Sugano, Elaine Caldeira de Oliveira Guirro, Marisa de Cássia Registro Fonseca\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17589983251352104\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Handgrip strength (HGS) is a key indicator of upper limb function and overall health. While the Jamar dynamometer is considered the gold standard for HGS assessment, alternatives like the Jamar Plus+ and Biodex have emerged, though their reliability and agreement remain underexplored.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the test-retest reliability and agreement of the Jamar, Jamar Plus+, and Biodex dynamometers in healthy young adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This exploratory cross-sectional study included 35 participants (22 females, 13 males; mean age 23.4 years). HGS was assessed using the three devices, following standardised protocols, with retest after 7 days. Reliability was analysed using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), Standard Error of Measurement (SEM), and Minimal Detectable Change (MDC). Agreement was examined through Bland-Altman plots and Limits of Agreement (LoA %).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Jamar and Jamar Plus+ showed excellent reliability (ICC = 0.96-0.98) and strong agreement, with narrow LoA percentages and low measurement error, especially on the non-dominant hand. In contrast, comparisons involving the Biodex revealed wider LoA (up to ±73%) and higher SEM and MDC values, indicating lower agreement with handheld devices. These discrepancies are likely due to differences in measurement principles, hand positioning, and unit conversion. Male participants showed significantly higher grip strength across all instruments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Jamar and Jamar Plus+ can be used interchangeably. The Biodex may be considered when appropriate adjustments are made, though its agreement with handheld dynamometers is limited. These findings highlight the need for standardised protocols and further research to ensure consistent and reliable HGS assessment across devices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43971,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hand Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"17589983251352104\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12228645/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hand Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17589983251352104\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hand Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17589983251352104","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:握力(HGS)是上肢功能和整体健康的重要指标。虽然Jamar测力计被认为是HGS评估的黄金标准,但Jamar Plus+和Biodex等替代方案已经出现,尽管它们的可靠性和一致性仍有待进一步探索。目的:评价Jamar、Jamar Plus+和Biodex测力仪在健康青年中的重测信度和一致性。方法:本探索性横断面研究纳入35名参与者(22名女性,13名男性;平均年龄23.4岁)。HGS采用三种设备,按照标准化方案进行评估,并在7天后重新测试。采用类内相关系数(ICC)、测量标准误差(SEM)和最小可检测变化(MDC)分析信度。通过Bland-Altman图和协议限度(LoA %)来检查协议。结果:Jamar和Jamar Plus+具有良好的信度(ICC = 0.96 ~ 0.98)和较强的一致性,LoA百分比窄,测量误差低,特别是在非优势手上。相比之下,涉及Biodex的比较显示更宽的LoA(高达±73%)和更高的SEM和MDC值,表明与手持设备的一致性较低。这些差异可能是由于测量原理、手定位和单位转换的差异。男性参与者在所有乐器上都表现出明显更高的握力。结论:Jamar与Jamar Plus+可互换使用。当进行适当的调整时,可以考虑Biodex,尽管它与手持式测力计的一致性是有限的。这些发现强调了标准化方案和进一步研究的必要性,以确保跨设备的一致和可靠的HGS评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of three different handgrip dynamometers (Jamar, Jamar Plus+ and Biodex) in healthy young adults.

Background: Handgrip strength (HGS) is a key indicator of upper limb function and overall health. While the Jamar dynamometer is considered the gold standard for HGS assessment, alternatives like the Jamar Plus+ and Biodex have emerged, though their reliability and agreement remain underexplored.

Aim: To evaluate the test-retest reliability and agreement of the Jamar, Jamar Plus+, and Biodex dynamometers in healthy young adults.

Methods: This exploratory cross-sectional study included 35 participants (22 females, 13 males; mean age 23.4 years). HGS was assessed using the three devices, following standardised protocols, with retest after 7 days. Reliability was analysed using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), Standard Error of Measurement (SEM), and Minimal Detectable Change (MDC). Agreement was examined through Bland-Altman plots and Limits of Agreement (LoA %).

Results: Jamar and Jamar Plus+ showed excellent reliability (ICC = 0.96-0.98) and strong agreement, with narrow LoA percentages and low measurement error, especially on the non-dominant hand. In contrast, comparisons involving the Biodex revealed wider LoA (up to ±73%) and higher SEM and MDC values, indicating lower agreement with handheld devices. These discrepancies are likely due to differences in measurement principles, hand positioning, and unit conversion. Male participants showed significantly higher grip strength across all instruments.

Conclusion: The Jamar and Jamar Plus+ can be used interchangeably. The Biodex may be considered when appropriate adjustments are made, though its agreement with handheld dynamometers is limited. These findings highlight the need for standardised protocols and further research to ensure consistent and reliable HGS assessment across devices.

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
Hand Therapy
Hand Therapy REHABILITATION-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
13
×
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