TY - JOUR

T1 - Reliability and validity of common hip adduction strength measures

T2 - The ForceFrame strength testing system versus the sphygmomanometer

AU - O’ Connor, Ciaran

AU - McIntyre, Martin

AU - Delahunt, Eamonn

AU - Thorborg, Kristian

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2022 Elsevier Ltd

PY - 2023

Y1 - 2023

N2 - Objectives: The criterion validity of the sphygmomanometer was evaluated, relative to the Force Frame strength testing system. Test-retest reliability was assessed for both hip adduction and abduction strength. Design: Test-retest reliability study and criterion validity study. Participants: 50 asymptomatic, field-sport athletes. Main outcome measures: Maximal isometric hip adduction and abduction strength were measured. Interclass correlation coefficient(ICC2,1) with confidence intervals were calculated to evaluate reliability of peak strength values. A Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient(r) was calculated to examine criterion validity of the sphygmomanometer as a measure of force when compared to the ForceFrame. Results: Intra-rater reliability for bilateral adduction testing using both ForceFrame and sphygmomanometer values revealed good-excellent reliability for both the 0° (ICC2.1 = 0.87–0.90) and 45° (ICC2.1 = 0.81–0.91) positions. ForceFrame values revealed good-excellent reliability for 0° abduction position and 45° abduction position. A good-moderate relationship (Pearson's r = 0.63) for 0° adduction position, and poor relationship (Pearson's r = 0.40) for 45° adduction position, were found between adduction squeeze values on ForceFrame and sphygmomanometer. Conclusion: Excellent reliability in hip adduction squeeze strength testing for both modes. However, there exists a ‘good to moderate’-‘fair’ relationship between the Force Frame and sphygmomanometer.

AB - Objectives: The criterion validity of the sphygmomanometer was evaluated, relative to the Force Frame strength testing system. Test-retest reliability was assessed for both hip adduction and abduction strength. Design: Test-retest reliability study and criterion validity study. Participants: 50 asymptomatic, field-sport athletes. Main outcome measures: Maximal isometric hip adduction and abduction strength were measured. Interclass correlation coefficient(ICC2,1) with confidence intervals were calculated to evaluate reliability of peak strength values. A Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient(r) was calculated to examine criterion validity of the sphygmomanometer as a measure of force when compared to the ForceFrame. Results: Intra-rater reliability for bilateral adduction testing using both ForceFrame and sphygmomanometer values revealed good-excellent reliability for both the 0° (ICC2.1 = 0.87–0.90) and 45° (ICC2.1 = 0.81–0.91) positions. ForceFrame values revealed good-excellent reliability for 0° abduction position and 45° abduction position. A good-moderate relationship (Pearson's r = 0.63) for 0° adduction position, and poor relationship (Pearson's r = 0.40) for 45° adduction position, were found between adduction squeeze values on ForceFrame and sphygmomanometer. Conclusion: Excellent reliability in hip adduction squeeze strength testing for both modes. However, there exists a ‘good to moderate’-‘fair’ relationship between the Force Frame and sphygmomanometer.

KW - Groin injuries

KW - Hip Adduction:Abduction ratio

KW - Hip injuries

KW - Squeeze test

U2 - 10.1016/j.ptsp.2022.12.010

DO - 10.1016/j.ptsp.2022.12.010

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 36566587

AN - SCOPUS:85144898679

VL - 59

SP - 162

EP - 167

JO - Physical Therapy in Sport

JF - Physical Therapy in Sport

SN - 1873-1600

ER -