Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 9 of 9 items for :

  • "break test" x
Clear All
Open access

Richard A. Brindle, David Ebaugh and Clare E. Milner

strengthening is a common component of treatment. 3 In a side-lying hip abductor strength test, an adduction force is applied to the patient’s limb through a handheld dynamometer that either matches or exceeds the patient’s maximum isometric force. In a hip abductor eccentric strength test or “break test,” the

Restricted access

Kate Anne McGirr, Thomas Kennedy, Carsten M. Mølgaard and Michael Skovdal Rathleff

Context:

Measurement of ankle evertor and invertor strength is important for assessment of ankle sprain risk and assessment of restoration of normal function after an ankle sprain.

Objective:

To compare the intra-tester reliability of ankle evertor and invertor strength measurements derived from hand-held dynamometry (HHD) and strap-mounted dynamometry (SMD) for both make-test and break-test techniques.

Participants:

25 healthy individuals.

Main Outcome Measure:

Repeated measurements of isometric evertor and invertor strength derived from both HHD and SMD devices using both make-test and break-test techniques.

Results:

High make-test reliability values were found for both inversion and eversion force measured by both the HHD and SMD devices (ICC = 0.80 to ICC = 0.88). The correlation coeffcients between HHD and SMD measurements for the inversion make-test, the inversion break-test, and the eversion make-test ranged from r = 0.74 to r = 0.87, but the correlation between HHD and SMD measurements for the eversion break-test was poor.

Conclusion:

The fndings suggest that testers with limited experience can obtain reliable measurements of ankle evertor and invertor strength using either HHD or SMD.

Restricted access

Frank E. Seagraves and Michael Horvat

The purpose of this investigation was to compare isometric test procedures (make vs. break tests by muscle groups) with elementary school girls, ages 9–11, using hand-held dynamometry. Fifty subjects in Grades 3 and 4 performed three trials on four muscle groups using each testing procedure following a preliminary session to allow familiarity with the instrumentation, test procedures, and test positions. Retest measurements were taken in 5–7 days with the order of the test procedures counterbalanced. Four 2 × 2 (Side × Test Condition) AM0VAs, with repeated measures on each-factor, were used to analyze the data. Significant Side × Test Condition interaction effects were evident for knee extension, elbow flexion, and shoulder abduction. Except for the knee extension, the break test produced higher values than the make test in all muscle groups, which is in agreement with previous investigations.

Restricted access

Christopher Kevin Wong, Lizbeth Conway, Grant Fleming, Caitlin Gopie, Dara Liebeskind and Stephen Xue

/min) Methodology Manipulation performed. Isometric strength and muscle activation tested immediately, 20-, 40-, and 60-min posttreatment. Subject strength screened for eligibility. Manipulation performed. Isometric strength measured pretreatment and posttreatment. Subjects screened with break test for eligibility

Restricted access

John H. Hollman, Tyler A. Berling, Ellen O. Crum, Kelsie M. Miller, Brent T. Simmons and James W. Youdas

surface). Two methodological differences may account for our varying results. We used ‘make’ tests with external strapping to establish MVICs whereas Ekstrom et al used manual ‘breaktests to establish MVICs. ‘Make’ tests involve muscle fiber shortening contractions and may induce greater amplitudes of

Open access

Robert Rodriguez

tested in supine. A break test was used to replicate an eccentric component. Strength was recorded with a handheld dynamometer. An alert was defined as any decrease in adductor strength measurement by >15% or a hip adductor/abductor ratio <0.90. Players completed electronic HAGOS scores for each subscale

Restricted access

James W. Youdas, Hannah E. Baartman, Brian J. Gahlon, Tyler J. Kohnen, Robert J. Sparling and John H. Hollman

described by Criswell and Cram 12 (Table  1 ). A common ground electrode was secured over the right medial malleolus. Maximum voluntary isometric contractions (MVICs) for each muscle were obtained via established muscle testing methods with manual break tests (Table  1 ). 13 Investigators offered verbal

Restricted access

Adam Culiver, J. Craig Garrison, Kalyssa M. Creed, John E. Conway, Shiho Goto and Sherry Werner

for data analysis. All isometric strength measurements were recorded with a handheld dynamometer (microFET2; Hoggan Health Industries, West Jordan, UT) using a break test, while participants were secured with a mobilization belt in the same manner as previously described. Hip extension strength was

Restricted access

Jakob Tarp, Anna Bugge, Niels Christian Møller, Heidi Klakk, Christina Trifonov Rexen, Anders Grøntved and Niels Wedderkopp

data on muscular endurance. We did not mutually adjust our models of individual muscle fitness phenotypes, so we are unable to disentangle any “independent” role of these distinct traits. Cardiorespiratory fitness was indirectly assessed by a 15-second run/15-second break test. The intermittent nature