Katrine Tranaas Vannebo1, Vegard Moe Iversen1, Marius Steiro Fimland2,3, Paul Jarle Mork1. 1. Department of Public Health and Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. 2. Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. 3. Unicare Helsefort Rehabilitation Centre, Rissa, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a lack of test-retest reliability studies of measurements of cervical muscle strength, taking into account gender and possible learning effects. OBJECTIVE: To investigate test-retest reliability of measurement of maximal isometric cervical muscle strength by handheld dynamometry. METHODS: Thirty women (age 20-58 years) and 28 men (age 20-60 years) participated in the study. Maximal isometric strength (neck flexion, neck extension, and right/left lateral flexion) was measured on three separate days at least five days apart by one evaluator. RESULTS: Intra-rater consistency tended to improve from day 1-2 measurements to day 2-3 measurements in both women and men. In women, the intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) for day 2 to day 3 measurements were 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-0.95) for neck flexion, 0.88 (95% CI, 0.76-0.94) for neck extension, 0.84 (95% CI, 0.68-0.92) for right lateral flexion, and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.78-0.95) for left lateral flexion. The corresponding ICCs among men were 0.86 (95% CI, 0.72-0.93) for neck flexion, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.85-0.97) for neck extension, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.65-0.91) for right lateral flexion and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.50-0.87) for left lateral flexion. CONCLUSION: This study describes a reliable and easy-to-administer test for assessing maximal isometric cervical muscle strength.
BACKGROUND: There is a lack of test-retest reliability studies of measurements of cervical muscle strength, taking into account gender and possible learning effects. OBJECTIVE: To investigate test-retest reliability of measurement of maximal isometric cervical muscle strength by handheld dynamometry. METHODS: Thirty women (age 20-58 years) and 28 men (age 20-60 years) participated in the study. Maximal isometric strength (neck flexion, neck extension, and right/left lateral flexion) was measured on three separate days at least five days apart by one evaluator. RESULTS: Intra-rater consistency tended to improve from day 1-2 measurements to day 2-3 measurements in both women and men. In women, the intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) for day 2 to day 3 measurements were 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-0.95) for neck flexion, 0.88 (95% CI, 0.76-0.94) for neck extension, 0.84 (95% CI, 0.68-0.92) for right lateral flexion, and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.78-0.95) for left lateral flexion. The corresponding ICCs among men were 0.86 (95% CI, 0.72-0.93) for neck flexion, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.85-0.97) for neck extension, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.65-0.91) for right lateral flexion and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.50-0.87) for left lateral flexion. CONCLUSION: This study describes a reliable and easy-to-administer test for assessing maximal isometric cervical muscle strength.