Agreement Between Handheld and Fixed Dynamometry for Hip Strength Assessment in Young Soccer Players and Non-Soccer Controls: An Exploratory Study
- 1Faculty of Rehabilitation, The Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw, Marymoncka 34, 00-968 Warsaw, Poland
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Handheld dynamometers are increasingly used for muscle strength assessment because of their low cost, portability, and ease of implementation in clinical and sports settings. However, it remains unclear whether measurements obtained using handheld and externally fixed dynamometers can be used interchangeably in young soccer players. This exploratory cross-sectional study compared measurements of hip adductor and abductor strength obtained using a handheld dynamometer (DynaMo) and an externally fixed dynamometer (ForceFrame) in young soccer players and non-soccer controls. Methods: Forty healthy men (20 U-21 soccer players and 20 non-soccer controls) were included. Isometric hip adduction and abduction strength were assessed bilaterally using DynaMo and ForceFrame during a single testing session. Agreement between measurement methods was evaluated using Bland–Altman analysis, and associations between methods were determined using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients. Results: Moderate to very strong positive correlations were observed between DynaMo and ForceFrame measurements (r = 0.44–0.96), although the correlation for left hip abduction in soccer players did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.052). Nevertheless, Bland–Altman analysis revealed a systematic bias, with ForceFrame producing higher normalized hip strength values than DynaMo across all assessments. The mean bias ranged from 2.02 to 3.34 N/kg (95% LoA 0.21 to 4.83 N/kg) in the soccer group, and 0.92 to 2.00 N/kg (95% LoA 0.18 to 2.93 N/kg) in the non-soccer group. Conclusions: Although moderate to very strong correlations were observed between the two dynamometry systems, systematic differences in recorded strength values indicate that the two systems may not be considered directly interchangeable for assessing hip abductor and adductor strength. For longitudinal monitoring and clinical decision-making, repeated assessments should preferably be performed using the same measurement system, and caution is warranted when interpreting absolute hip muscle strength values. Given the exploratory design and relatively small sample, these findings should be interpreted cautiously and confirmed in larger studies.
Related
- Measurement Properties of Hand-Held Dynamometry for Ankle Strength Assessment: A COSMIN-Based Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
- Exploratory Agreement of 3D Body Surface Analysis with Expert Manual Assessment of Pelvic Malalignment in Patients with Non-Acute Low Back Pain: A Prospective Pilot Study with Linked Post-Hoc Analyses
- How do innovative occluding glasses compare with handheld spoon shaped occluders in children's visual acuity test? A diagnostic agreement study
- Assessment of cardiac image quality from single-probe handheld ultrasound devices.
- Factors Associated with Relative Handgrip Strength among Medical Students in Serbia: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Study
BibTeX
@article{borkowski2026agreement,
title = {{Agreement Between Handheld and Fixed Dynamometry for Hip Strength Assessment in Young Soccer Players and Non-Soccer Controls: An Exploratory Study}},
author = {Rafał Borkowski and Jakub Grodzki and Patrycja Adamska},
journal = {Journal of Clinical Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3390/jcm15218416},
url = {https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/21/8416},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Agreement Between Handheld and Fixed Dynamometry for Hip Strength Assessment in Young Soccer Players and Non-Soccer Controls: An Exploratory Study
AU - Rafał Borkowski
AU - Jakub Grodzki
AU - Patrycja Adamska
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/29
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
DO - 10.3390/jcm15218416
UR - https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/21/8416
AB - Background/Objectives: Handheld dynamometers are increasingly used for muscle strength assessment because of their low cost, portability, and ease of implementation in clinical and sports settings. However, it remains unclear whether measurements obtained using handheld and externally fixed dynamometers can be used interchangeably in young soccer players. This exploratory cross-sectional study compared measurements of hip adductor and abductor strength obtained using a handheld dynamometer (DynaMo) and an externally fixed dynamometer (ForceFrame) in young soccer players and non-soccer controls. Methods: Forty healthy men (20 U-21 soccer players and 20 non-soccer controls) were included. Isometric hip adduction and abduction strength were assessed bilaterally using DynaMo and ForceFrame during a single testing session. Agreement between measurement methods was evaluated using Bland–Altman analysis, and associations between methods were determined using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients. Results: Moderate to very strong positive correlations were observed between DynaMo and ForceFrame measurements (r = 0.44–0.96), although the correlation for left hip abduction in soccer players did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.052). Nevertheless, Bland–Altman analysis revealed a systematic bias, with ForceFrame producing higher normalized hip strength values than DynaMo across all assessments. The mean bias ranged from 2.02 to 3.34 N/kg (95% LoA 0.21 to 4.83 N/kg) in the soccer group, and 0.92 to 2.00 N/kg (95% LoA 0.18 to 2.93 N/kg) in the non-soccer group. Conclusions: Although moderate to very strong correlations were observed between the two dynamometry systems, systematic differences in recorded strength values indicate that the two systems may not be considered directly interchangeable for assessing hip abductor and adductor strength. For longitudinal monitoring and clinical decision-making, repeated assessments should preferably be performed using the same measurement system, and caution is warranted when interpreting absolute hip muscle strength values. Given the exploratory design and relatively small sample, these findings should be interpreted cautiously and confirmed in larger studies.
SN - 2077-0383
ER -