School of Chiropractic and Sports Science, Faculty of Health Science, Murdoch University, Health Sciences, South Street, Perth, Western Australia 6150, Australia.
PM R. 2011 May;3(5):472-9. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2010.10.025.
To examine the current evidence regarding the reliability and validity of hand-held dynamometry for assessment of muscle strength in the clinical setting.
A search was conducted of the following databases: Cochrane, MEDLINE, PubMed, PEDro, OTseeker, Index to Chiropractic Literature (ICL), and MANTIS, from inception until January 29, 2010.
The MeSH subject heading "muscle strength dynamometer" was searched, in isolation and in combination with the text word phrases "hand-held dynamometer" and "isokinetic." Four hundred fifty-four different studies met this search and were reviewed for possible inclusion.
Two independent reviewers assessed the quality of the included manuscripts. The PEDro data collection system was used in conjunction with the Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Description. A third reviewer was used when there was disagreement between the primary reviewers.
Seventeen manuscripts met the inclusion criteria for this review, with a total of 19 studies (2 of the manuscripts involved 2 separate studies) that compared hand-held dynamometry with an identified reference standard (isokinetic muscle strength testing). The results demonstrated minimal differences between hand-held dynamometry and isokinetic testing.
Considering hand-held dynamometry's ease of use, portability, cost, and compact size, compared with isokinetic devices this instrument can be regarded as a reliable and valid instrument for muscle strength assessment in a clinical setting.
检验目前有关手持式测力计在临床环境下评估肌肉力量的可靠性和有效性的证据。
从建库起至 2010 年 1 月 29 日,我们在以下数据库中进行了检索:Cochrane、MEDLINE、PubMed、PEDro、OTseeker、Chiropractic Literature Index(ICL)和 MANTIS。
我们单独并结合文本词短语“hand-held dynamometer”和“isokinetic”搜索了 MeSH 主题词“肌肉力量测力计”。有 454 种不同的研究符合这一检索标准并被纳入可能的研究范围。
两名独立的评审员评估了纳入研究的质量。PEDro 数据采集系统与 Cochrane 诊断性测试准确性描述结合使用。当主要评审员之间存在分歧时,使用第三名评审员。
有 17 篇文献符合本综述的纳入标准,共 19 项研究(其中 2 篇文献涉及 2 项独立研究)将手持式测力计与确定的参考标准(等速肌肉力量测试)进行了比较。结果表明,手持式测力计与等速测试之间存在微小差异。
与等速设备相比,考虑到手持式测力计易于使用、便携、经济且体积小巧,它可被视为临床环境下肌肉力量评估的可靠且有效的仪器。