Skip to main content

Table 7 Reliability of toe dynamometry and the paper grip test

From: Importance and challenges of measuring intrinsic foot muscle strength

Method

Test

Paper

Participant

Reliability

Comment

    

Statistic

Intrarater

Interrater

Test-retest

 
     

Hallux toe

Lesser toes

Comb

Hallux toe

Lesser toes

Hallux toe

Lesser toe

 

Direct

Toe Dynamometry

Spink et al. (2010)[50]

Young Vs Older participant

ICC

0.94 (95%CI 0.90-0.96

0.83 (95%CI 0.74-0.89)

n/a

0.88 (95%CI 0.81-0.92)

0.82 (95%CI 0.73-0.89)

n/a

n/a

Excellent

Age: Young 23.2± 4.3year

Older 77.1± 5.7year

Sex M & F n=72

Goldmann & Bruggemann (2012)[39]

Healthy Participants

Pearson correlation coefficient(r)

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

0.91(combined)

Excellent

Age 27 ± 3year

Sex M n=20

Paper Grip Test

De Win et al. (2002)[14]

Leprosy Vs healthy control

non-weighted kappa

0.56 (95%CI 0.36-0.76)

0.56 (95%CI 0.39-0.74)

n/a

0.87 (95%CI 0.67-1.0)

0.87 (95%CI 0.34-0.87)

n/a

n/a

Excellent

Age 30.3year

Sex M & F n= 43

  1. Legend: Abbreviations: M-Male, F-Female, Comb-combined. Reliability was interpreted in terms of benchmarks suggested by Fleiss [51] where an ICC or Kappa value (excellent reliability, >0.75; fair to good reliability, 0.40–0.75; and poor reliability, <0.4.