Dhruvkumar Laheru1, Jack C Kerr, Alison H McGregor. 1. Biosurgery and Surgical Technology, Division of Surgery, Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College London, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To improve the reproducibility of testing hip abduction and adduction using an isokinetic dynamometer by a novel testing protocol. DESIGN: Test-retest design. SETTING: Biodynamics laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen healthy subjects (9 men, 6 women; age, 22.4+/-0.5 y) were recruited. INTERVENTIONS: Two setups were compared: the first according to manufacturer's guidelines (setup A) and the second a novel setup incorporating pelvic fixation (setup B). Setups A and B were performed in a random order. Both setups included the same battery of isokinetic (30 degrees/s, 60 degrees/s) and isometric tests, and were repeated 1 week later. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The peak torque for each abduction and adduction exercise was noted and pelvic motion during testing was recorded. RESULTS: Setup B significantly (P<.05) reduced transverse pelvic rotation by between 7.5 degrees and 8.0 degrees dependent on test speed. Mean differences for reproducibility of peak torque, ranged from 0.8 to 11.7 Nm. The coefficients of repeatability of both setups were similar, ranging from 21.4 to 56.3 Nm across isokinetic exercises. A similar observation was noted for isometric exercises, with the differences between the coefficients of repeatability ranging from 18.6 to 40.0 Nm. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing pelvic rotation does not enhance reproducibility of the system and is not related to torque production. Further research is required to determine the optimal test setup.
OBJECTIVE: To improve the reproducibility of testing hip abduction and adduction using an isokinetic dynamometer by a novel testing protocol. DESIGN: Test-retest design. SETTING: Biodynamics laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen healthy subjects (9 men, 6 women; age, 22.4+/-0.5 y) were recruited. INTERVENTIONS: Two setups were compared: the first according to manufacturer's guidelines (setup A) and the second a novel setup incorporating pelvic fixation (setup B). Setups A and B were performed in a random order. Both setups included the same battery of isokinetic (30 degrees/s, 60 degrees/s) and isometric tests, and were repeated 1 week later. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The peak torque for each abduction and adduction exercise was noted and pelvic motion during testing was recorded. RESULTS: Setup B significantly (P<.05) reduced transverse pelvic rotation by between 7.5 degrees and 8.0 degrees dependent on test speed. Mean differences for reproducibility of peak torque, ranged from 0.8 to 11.7 Nm. The coefficients of repeatability of both setups were similar, ranging from 21.4 to 56.3 Nm across isokinetic exercises. A similar observation was noted for isometric exercises, with the differences between the coefficients of repeatability ranging from 18.6 to 40.0 Nm. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing pelvic rotation does not enhance reproducibility of the system and is not related to torque production. Further research is required to determine the optimal test setup.
Authors: Kathleen K Mangione; Rebecca L Craik; Kerstin M Palombaro; Susan S Tomlinson; Mary T Hofmann Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Luke McCarney; Alexander Andrews; Phoebe Henry; Azharuddin Fazalbhoy; Isaac Selva Raj; Noel Lythgo; Julie C Kendall Journal: Chiropr Man Therap Date: 2020-10-19