Cargando…

Validity and test–retest reliability of a novel simple back extensor muscle strength test

OBJECTIVES: To develop and determine convergent validity and reliability of a simple and inexpensive clinical test to quantify back extensor muscle strength. METHODS: Two testing sessions were conducted, 7 days apart. Each session involved three trials of standing maximal isometric back extensor mus...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Harding, Amy T, Weeks, Benjamin Kurt, Horan, Sean A, Little, Andrew, Watson, Steven L, Beck, Belinda Ruth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5315361/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28255442
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2050312116688842
_version_ 1782508678182600704
author Harding, Amy T
Weeks, Benjamin Kurt
Horan, Sean A
Little, Andrew
Watson, Steven L
Beck, Belinda Ruth
author_facet Harding, Amy T
Weeks, Benjamin Kurt
Horan, Sean A
Little, Andrew
Watson, Steven L
Beck, Belinda Ruth
author_sort Harding, Amy T
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To develop and determine convergent validity and reliability of a simple and inexpensive clinical test to quantify back extensor muscle strength. METHODS: Two testing sessions were conducted, 7 days apart. Each session involved three trials of standing maximal isometric back extensor muscle strength using both the novel test and isokinetic dynamometry. Lumbar spine bone mineral density was examined by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Validation was examined with Pearson correlations (r). Test–retest reliability was examined with intraclass correlation coefficients and limits of agreement. Pearson correlations and intraclass correlation coefficients are presented with corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Linear regression was used to examine the ability of peak back extensor muscle strength to predict indices of lumbar spine bone mineral density and strength. RESULTS: A total of 52 healthy adults (26 men, 26 women) aged 46.4 ± 20.4 years were recruited from the community. A strong positive relationship was observed between peak back extensor strength from hand-held and isokinetic dynamometry (r = 0.824, p < 0.001). For the novel back extensor strength test, short- and long-term reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.983 (95% confidence interval, 0.971–0.990), p < 0.001 and intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.901 (95% confidence interval, 0.833–0.943), p < 0.001, respectively). Limits of agreement for short-term repeated back extensor strength measures with the novel back extensor strength protocol were −6.63 to 7.70 kg, with a mean bias of +0.71 kg. Back extensor strength predicted 11% of variance in lumbar spine bone mineral density (p < 0.05) and 9% of lumbar spine index of bone structural strength (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our novel hand-held dynamometer method to determine back extensor muscle strength is quick, relatively inexpensive, and reliable; demonstrates initial convergent validity in a healthy population; and is associated with bone mass at a clinically important site.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5315361
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53153612017-03-02 Validity and test–retest reliability of a novel simple back extensor muscle strength test Harding, Amy T Weeks, Benjamin Kurt Horan, Sean A Little, Andrew Watson, Steven L Beck, Belinda Ruth SAGE Open Med Original Article OBJECTIVES: To develop and determine convergent validity and reliability of a simple and inexpensive clinical test to quantify back extensor muscle strength. METHODS: Two testing sessions were conducted, 7 days apart. Each session involved three trials of standing maximal isometric back extensor muscle strength using both the novel test and isokinetic dynamometry. Lumbar spine bone mineral density was examined by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Validation was examined with Pearson correlations (r). Test–retest reliability was examined with intraclass correlation coefficients and limits of agreement. Pearson correlations and intraclass correlation coefficients are presented with corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Linear regression was used to examine the ability of peak back extensor muscle strength to predict indices of lumbar spine bone mineral density and strength. RESULTS: A total of 52 healthy adults (26 men, 26 women) aged 46.4 ± 20.4 years were recruited from the community. A strong positive relationship was observed between peak back extensor strength from hand-held and isokinetic dynamometry (r = 0.824, p < 0.001). For the novel back extensor strength test, short- and long-term reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.983 (95% confidence interval, 0.971–0.990), p < 0.001 and intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.901 (95% confidence interval, 0.833–0.943), p < 0.001, respectively). Limits of agreement for short-term repeated back extensor strength measures with the novel back extensor strength protocol were −6.63 to 7.70 kg, with a mean bias of +0.71 kg. Back extensor strength predicted 11% of variance in lumbar spine bone mineral density (p < 0.05) and 9% of lumbar spine index of bone structural strength (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our novel hand-held dynamometer method to determine back extensor muscle strength is quick, relatively inexpensive, and reliable; demonstrates initial convergent validity in a healthy population; and is associated with bone mass at a clinically important site. SAGE Publications 2017-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5315361/ /pubmed/28255442 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2050312116688842 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page(https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Article
Harding, Amy T
Weeks, Benjamin Kurt
Horan, Sean A
Little, Andrew
Watson, Steven L
Beck, Belinda Ruth
Validity and test–retest reliability of a novel simple back extensor muscle strength test
title Validity and test–retest reliability of a novel simple back extensor muscle strength test
title_full Validity and test–retest reliability of a novel simple back extensor muscle strength test
title_fullStr Validity and test–retest reliability of a novel simple back extensor muscle strength test
title_full_unstemmed Validity and test–retest reliability of a novel simple back extensor muscle strength test
title_short Validity and test–retest reliability of a novel simple back extensor muscle strength test
title_sort validity and test–retest reliability of a novel simple back extensor muscle strength test
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5315361/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28255442
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2050312116688842
work_keys_str_mv AT hardingamyt validityandtestretestreliabilityofanovelsimplebackextensormusclestrengthtest
AT weeksbenjaminkurt validityandtestretestreliabilityofanovelsimplebackextensormusclestrengthtest
AT horanseana validityandtestretestreliabilityofanovelsimplebackextensormusclestrengthtest
AT littleandrew validityandtestretestreliabilityofanovelsimplebackextensormusclestrengthtest
AT watsonstevenl validityandtestretestreliabilityofanovelsimplebackextensormusclestrengthtest
AT beckbelindaruth validityandtestretestreliabilityofanovelsimplebackextensormusclestrengthtest