The Validity and Reliability of Two Commercially Available Load Sensors for Clinical Strength Assessment.
| Autor: | Merry K; Department of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada.; Centre for Hip Health and Mobility, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada., Napier C; Department of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada.; Centre for Hip Health and Mobility, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada.; Menrva Research Group, School of Mechatronic Systems Engineering, Simon Fraser University, 250-13450 102 Avenue, Surrey, BC V3T 0A3, Canada., Chung V; Centre for Hip Health and Mobility, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada., Hannigan BC; Menrva Research Group, School of Mechatronic Systems Engineering, Simon Fraser University, 250-13450 102 Avenue, Surrey, BC V3T 0A3, Canada.; Department of Health and Technology, ETH Zürich, Lengghalde 5, 8008 Zürich, Switzerland., MacPherson M; School of Health and Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC V1V 1V7, Canada., Menon C; Menrva Research Group, School of Mechatronic Systems Engineering, Simon Fraser University, 250-13450 102 Avenue, Surrey, BC V3T 0A3, Canada.; Department of Health and Technology, ETH Zürich, Lengghalde 5, 8008 Zürich, Switzerland., Scott A; Department of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada.; Centre for Hip Health and Mobility, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada. |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Zdroj: | Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) [Sensors (Basel)] 2021 Dec 16; Vol. 21 (24). Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Dec 16. |
| DOI: | 10.3390/s21248399 |
| Abstrakt: | Objective: Handheld dynamometers are common tools for assessing/monitoring muscular strength and endurance. Health/fitness Bluetooth load sensors may provide a cost-effective alternative; however, research is needed to evaluate the validity and reliability of such devices. This study assessed the validity and reliability of two commercially available Bluetooth load sensors (Activ5 by Activbody and Progressor by Tindeq). Methods: Four tests were conducted on each device: stepped loading, stress relaxation, simulated exercise, and hysteresis. Each test type was repeated three times using the Instron ElectroPuls mechanical testing device (a gold-standard system). Test-retest reliability was assessed through intraclass correlations. Agreement with the gold standard was assessed with Pearson's correlation, interclass correlation, and Lin's concordance correlation. Results: The Activ5 and Progressor had excellent test-retest reliability across all four tests (ICC(3,1) ≥ 0.999, all p ≤ 0.001). Agreement with the gold standard was excellent for both the Activ5 (ρ ≥ 0.998, ICC(3,1) ≥ 0.971, ρ Conclusion: Excellent test-retest reliability was found, suggesting that both devices can be used in a clinical setting to measure patient progress over time; however, the Activ5 consistently had poorer agreement with the gold standard (particularly at higher loads). |
| Databáze: | MEDLINE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|