Reliability and validity of an electronic dynamometer for measuring grip strength
Abstract
Aims: This article describes a study aiming to establish the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of the Biometrics E-LINK EP9 electronic dynamometer. Methods: Grip strength testing was performed on 49 healthy participants. Three trials were completed for the right and left hands on the Biometrics and Jamar dynamometers, using a repeated measures design. Data was compared and used to establish concurrent validity of the Biometrics dynamometer. Fifteen participants repeated the testing a week later, for test-retest reliability of the Biometrics dynamometer. Findings: The Biometrics E-LINK EP9 evaluation system was found to have excellent validity (ICC 0.983-0.986). However, a small but statistically significant difference between the right hand grip strength scores of the Biometrics (31.65 ± 8.89) and Jamar (30.44 ± 9.49) dynamometer was revealed (p ≤ 0.05). Test-retest reliability of the Biometrics system proved excellent, with ICC scores of 0.986 for the left hand and 0.996 for the right hand. Conclusions: The results indicate that the Biometrics E-LINK EP9 evaluation system is valid, reliable and comparable to the Jamar hydraulic dynamometer, when used for measuring grip strength with the second handle position. However, due to the statistically significant differences found for the right hand grip strength scores, therapists should exercise caution when interchanging instruments.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The physical and cognitive status of each participant was tested using the 5x sit-to-stand-test (5XSST), grip force test, and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA).
“In addition, the physical and cognitive status of each participant was tested.A functional test for the general fitness and frailty (5x sit-to-stand-test (5XSST), (Treacy and Hassett 2018)), the grip force test (Allen and Barnett 2011) and a test to measure the cognitive status of the participants (Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), (Nasreddine et al. 2005)) were examined.”
From Advanced Sensing and Human Activity Recognition in Early Intervention and Rehabilitation of Elderly People (2020) · cites this paper as Allen and Barnett 2011
Cites
Foundations of clinical research application to practice
Portney, L. (1993) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,133 · see citing works
Vincent, W. J. (1994) · Cited by 1,021 · see citing works
Handgrip strength testing: A review of the literature
Innes, E. (1999) · Australian Occupational Therapy Journal · doi:10.1046/j.1440-1630.1999.00182.x · Cited by 514 · see citing works
Bechtol, C. O. (1954) · Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery · doi:10.2106/00004623-195436040-00013 · Cited by 374 · see citing works
Comparison of Rolyan and Jamar dynamometers for measuring grip strength
Mathiowetz, V. G. (2002) · Occupational Therapy International · doi:10.1002/oti.165 · Cited by 346 · see citing works
Bohannon, R. W., & Schaubert, K. L. (2005) · Journal of Hand Therapy · doi:10.1197/j.jht.2005.07.003 · Cited by 251 · see citing works
Reliability and Validity of the DynEx Dynamometer
Shechtman, O., Gestewitz, L., & Kimble, C. (2005) · Journal of Hand Therapy · doi:10.1197/j.jht.2005.04.002 · Cited by 185 · see citing works
The need for reliability and validity in hand assessment instruments
Fess, E. E. (1986) · The Journal Of Hand Surgery · doi:10.1016/s0363-5023(86)80001-6 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Which setting of the dynamometer provides maximal grip strength?
FIRRELL, J. C., & Crain, G. M. (1996) · The Journal Of Hand Surgery · doi:10.1016/s0363-5023(96)80351-0 · Cited by 141 · see citing works
Effects of three trials on grip and pinch strength measurements
Mathiowetz, V. G. (1990) · Journal of Hand Therapy · doi:10.1016/s0894-1130(12)80377-2 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Reliability and validity of indices of hand-grip strength and endurance
Reuter, S. E., Massy‐Westropp, N., & Evans, A. M. (2010) · Australian Occupational Therapy Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1440-1630.2010.00888.x · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Comparison of Baseline Instruments to the Jamar Dynamometer and the B&L Engineering Pinch Gauge
Mathiowetz, V. G., Vizenor, L., & Melander, D. (2000) · The Occupational Therapy Journal of Research · doi:10.1177/153944920002000301 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Reliability and validity of the BTE-Primus grip tool
Shechtman, O., Davenport, R. D., Malcolm, M. P., et al. (2003) · Journal of Hand Therapy · doi:10.1016/s0894-1130(03)80022-4 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Svens, B., & Lee, H. (2005) · The British Journal of Hand Therapy · doi:10.1177/175899830501000202 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Parallel Comparison of Grip Strength Measures Obtained with a Microfet 4 and a Jamar Dynamometer
Bohannon, R. W. (2005) · Perceptual and Motor Skills · doi:10.2466/pms.100.3.795-798 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Schrader, L., Vargas Toro, A., Konietzny, S., Rüping, S., Schäpers, B., Steinböck, M., Krewer, C., Müller, F., Güttler, J., & Bock, T. (2020) · Journal of Population Ageing · doi:10.1007/s12062-020-09260-z · Cited by 110 · see citing works
- Authors
- Allen, D., & Barnett, F.
- Affiliations
- James Cook University (AU)
- ORCID
- Barnett, Fiona
- Venue
- International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation
- Publisher
- Mark Allen Group
- Published
- 2011-05
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 258-264
- ISSN
- 1741-1645 (ISSN-L)
- 1759-779X
- OpenAlex
- W1999347017
- Cited by
- 50
- References
- 15
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 1.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
- ResearchOnline - JCU (James Cook University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
- Keywords
- grip strength, Jamar dynamometer, concurrent validity, test-retest reliability, inter-instrument agreement
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
