Hand-Held Dynamometry & Reliability

This is a comparative review of three articles regarding the reliability of hand-held dynamometric measurements for assessment of the long-term stability of isometric force production measurements in muscles. The focus of this review is to provide a summary and comparative analysis of the articles. The merits and limits of each will be presented with a comparative discussion of sample groups, survey methods, findings, and analysis.

1. "Long-term stability of hand-held dynamometric measurements in children who have myelomeningocele" by Effgen & Brown.

This study assessed long-term stability of hand-held dynamometric measurements of isometric force production, in 30 muscle groups, before and after a 23-day interval. The sample was 12 children with myelomeningocele, 3 boys and 9 girls, aged 9.8 years to 17.4 years. A limit of this study was its small sample size which was further reduced by the end of the testing. A hand-held dynamometer (Spark) was used to test isometric force production of upper- and lower-extremity muscle groups. Body muscle groups on both sides were tested; side to be tested first was selected randomly at the precamp test session. Same test procedures were repeated 23 days later. The examiner, blind to previous measures, was the same for both sessions. Interrater reliability was assessed on each testing day, on randomly selected muscle groups. Two researchers verified

. . .
osteoarthritis in the knee" by Hayes and Falconer. This study demonstrated the reliability of hand-held dynamometers (HHD) by comparing data with that from manual muscle tests (MMT). The sample was 43 patients, mostly women (71.7 percent), with a mean age of 65.6 years, with osteoarthritis. The need for and strength of this study of a homogeneous group of patients with orthopaedic problems was noted; previous studies consist of healthy subjects and patients with neuromuscular disorders and healthy subjects do not give adequate range of strength measurements for the determination of reliability of measurement for specific populations. This study offered a larger sample size than Effgen and Brown. Knee extensor strength was measured by HHD and MMT. Examiners tested different patients. A lack of trunk stabilization may have biased results but the effect would be similar for both HHD and MMT. MMT was performed before HHD tests; passive tests of joint condition separated tests. Spark dynamometer was used. Examiners did not have previous experience with HHD and practice was with the instruction manual; this inexperience was a weakness of this study. Effgen and Brown offered more attempts to insure reliability and stability
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Effgen Brown, Hayes Falconer, HHD HHD, Phillips Sannes, RELIABILITY Introduction, MMT Factors, MMT MMT, Falconer Reliability, Sannes Interrater, MMT Examiners, effgen brown, sample size, reliability hand-held, hand-held dynamometry, reliability hand-held dynamometry, weakness study, dynamometric measurements, previous studies, hand-held dynamometric, long-term stability, hand-held dynamometric measurements, stability hand-held dynamometric, grip strength, body weight grip, study effgen brown,
Approximate Word count = 1512
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Hand-Held Dynamometry & Reliability