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 |