CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 152Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationReliability and Agreement in MeasurementSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reliability of the Isokinetic Trunk Extensor Test, Biering-Sørensen Test, and Åstrand Bicycle Test: Assessment of Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and Critical Difference in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain and Healthy Individuals

Keller, Anne, Hellesnes, Jan, Jens I. Brox, and·2001·Spine
DOI 10.1097/00007632-200104010-00017
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: A reliability study was performed. OBJECTIVE: To determine the intersession reproducibility of the isokinetic trunk extensor strength test, the Biering-Sørensen test, and the Astrand test by calculation of the intraclass correlation coefficient and the critical difference. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Several physical measurements have been used in clinical evaluation of patients with chronic low back pain. Reliability can be evaluated by calculation of either intraclass correlation coefficient or critical difference, but interpretation of the results may vary depending on which method is used. METHODS: For this study, 31 patients with chronic low back pain carried out the isokinetic trunk extensor test, the Biering-Sørensen test, and the Astrand test as also did age- and gender-matched healthy individuals. Measurements were performed in three separate sessions at the same time of the day and by the same experienced examiner. The intervals between the sessions were 5 to 10 days. RESULTS: The isokinetic tests showed a learning effect between Tests 1 and 2. For the isokinetic test, the critical difference increased with increased angular velocities from 28% to 63% in the patients and from 27% to 39% in the healthy subjects. The critical differences for the patients and the healthy individuals were 57% vs 54% for the Biering-Sørensen test and 21% vs 23% for the Astrand test, respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient ranged from 93% to 98% in the patients and 80%-98% in the healthy individuals. CONCLUSIONS: The reliability was found to be acceptable for the Astrand test and the isokinetic test at 60 degrees per second, as evaluated by the critical difference. All the tests were highly reliable according to the intraclass correlation coefficient, except for Biering-Sørensen test for healthy individuals. The critical difference is the preferable measure because calculation of the intraclass correlation coefficient may give a misleading high estimate of reliability.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00007632-200104010-00017

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 31 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Friedlander, 1991, Research study, 14, 220
  2. Hupli, 1996, The effect of repetition on measurement of isokinetic performance capacity of trunk muscles among healthy controls two different groups of low back-pain patients Scand J Rehabil Med, 28, 201
  3. Kroll, 1963, Res Q, 34, 50

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Keller, A., Hellesnes, J., & Jens I. Brox, A.
Affiliations
Oslo University Hospital (NO)
Corresponding author
  • Keller, Anne
  • Hellesnes, Jan
Venue
Spine
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2001-04
Volume
26
Issue
7
Pages
771-777
ISSN
0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/00007632-200104010-00017
OpenAlex
W1970531803
Cited by
152
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 10
FWCI
4.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Spine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Keywords
test-retest reliability, chronic low back pain, critical difference, intraclass correlation coefficient, learning effects, angular velocity, trunk muscle strength
MeSH terms
Adult, Chronic Disease, Exercise Test, Female, Humans, Isometric Contraction, Male, Middle Aged, Muscles, Physical Endurance, Reproducibility of Results, Low Back Pain, Sex Distribution, Muscle, Skeletal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review