School of Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, Health & Human Services, University of Toledo, Mail Stop 1199, 201 W. Bancroft St, Toledo, OH, 43606-3390, USA.
La Trobe Sport and Exercise Medicine Research Centre, School of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Discipline of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Phys Ther Sport. 2024 Sep;69:59-66. doi: 10.1016/j.ptsp.2024.07.004. Epub 2024 Jul 22.
To investigate the intra-rater reliability and validity of belt-stabilized and tension dynamometry to assess hip muscle strength and power.
Repeated measures.
Biomechanics laboratory.
Seventeen uninjured adults (age = 22.0 ± 2.3y; 13 females).
Peak torque (strength) and rate of torque development (RTD; power) were measured for hip abduction, internal rotation, external rotation and extension using an isokinetic dynamometer, and belt-stabilized and tension dynamometry.
For peak torque assessment, belt-stabilized and tension dynamometry showed good (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient [ICC] = 0.848-0.899) and good-to-excellent (ICC = 0.848-0.942) reliability, respectively. For RTD, belt-stabilized dynamometry showed fair reliability for abduction (ICC = 0.524) and good reliability for hip internal rotation, external rotation, and extension (ICC = 0.702-0.899). Tension dynamometry showed good reliability for all motions when measuring RTD (ICC = 0.737-0.897). Compared to isokinetic dynamometry, belt-stabilized and tension dynamometry showed good-to-excellent correlations for peak torque assessment (r = 0.503-0.870), and fair-to-good correlations for RTD (r = 0.438-0.674). Bland-Altman analysis showed that measures from belt-stabilized and tension dynamometry had clinically meaningful disagreement with isokinetic dynamometry.
Tension dynamometry is reliable for assessing hip strength and power in all assessed motions. Belt-stabilized dynamometry is reliable for assessing internal rotation, external rotation, and extension. Validity of both methods is questionable, considering the lack of agreement with isokinetic dynamometry.
研究腰带稳定和张力测力评估髋关节肌力和力量的内部信度和效度。
重复测量。
生物力学实验室。
17 名未受伤的成年人(年龄=22.0±2.3 岁;13 名女性)。
使用等速测力仪和腰带稳定及张力测力仪测量髋关节外展、内旋、外旋和伸展的峰值扭矩(力量)和扭矩发展率(RTD;力量)。
对于峰值扭矩评估,腰带稳定和张力测力仪分别显示出良好(组内相关系数[ICC] = 0.848-0.899)和良好至优秀(ICC = 0.848-0.942)的可靠性。对于 RTD,腰带稳定测力仪在外展时显示出适度的可靠性(ICC = 0.524),而在内旋、外旋和伸展时显示出良好的可靠性(ICC = 0.702-0.899)。张力测力仪在测量 RTD 时对所有运动均显示出良好的可靠性(ICC = 0.737-0.897)。与等速测力仪相比,腰带稳定和张力测力仪在峰值扭矩评估方面显示出良好至优秀的相关性(r = 0.503-0.870),在 RTD 方面显示出适度至良好的相关性(r = 0.438-0.674)。Bland-Altman 分析表明,腰带稳定和张力测力仪的测量值与等速测力仪存在临床上有意义的差异。
张力测力仪在所有评估运动中均可靠地评估髋关节的力量和力量。腰带稳定测力仪可靠地评估内旋、外旋和伸展。考虑到与等速测力仪缺乏一致性,两种方法的有效性都值得怀疑。