SAĞLIKLI GENÇ YETİŞKİNLERDE DİNAMOMETRE İLE İNTRİNSİK AYAK KAS KUVVETİ DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİNDE "MAKE" VE "BREAK" TESTLERİNİN GÜVENİRLİĞİ

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 31 Sayı: 3, 263 - 269, 17.12.2020

Gökhan Yazıcı Fatmagül Varol Melek Volkan Seyit Çıtaker

https://doi.org/10.21653/tjpr.736578

Cited By: 2

Öz

Amaç: “Make” ve “break” testleri el dinamometreleri ile izometrik kas kuvvet ölçümü sırasında kullanılan değerlendirme teknikleridir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, sağlıklı genç yetişkinlerde el dinamometresi ile yapılan “make” ve “break” testlerinin intrinsik ayak kas kuvveti değerlendirmesinde güvenirliğinin incelenmesiydi. Yöntem: Yetmiş beş sağlıklı yetişkin test-tekrar test protokolünü beş gün ara ile tamamladı. İntrinsik ayak kaslarının maksimum izometrik kuvvet ölçümü "make" ve "break” testleri ile dijital el dinamometresi kullanılarak ölçüldü. Test-tekrar test güvenirliği sınıf içi korelasyon katsayıları (ICC) kullanılarak hesaplandı. Minimal tespit edilebilir değişiklikler, standart hata ölçümleri kullanılarak hesaplandı. Sonuçlar: Analizlere göre, "break" testinin kuvvet sonuçlarının tüm kaslarda "make" testine göre daha yüksek olduğu bulundu (p<0,05). İntrinsik ayak kaslarının kuvvet ölçümlerinin, hem "make" hem de "break" testinde neredeyse mükemmel bir test-tekrar test güvenirliğine sahip olduğu belirlendi (ICC=0,938-0,986). Tartışma: Sağlıklı yetişkinlerin, intrinsik ayak kaslarının tüm kas kuvveti ölçümlerinde test-tekrar test sonuçlarının stabil olduğu gösterilmiştir. El dinamometresi ile değerlendirilen “make” ve “break” testleri sağlıklı yetişkinlerde intrinsik ayak kaslarının kuvvet ölçümünde güvenilir yöntemlerdir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Değerlendirme, Ayak, Kas Kuvveti Dinamometresi, Güvenirlik

Destekleyen Kurum

yok

Proje Numarası

yok

Teşekkür

Yazarlar Arzu Güçlü-Gündüz'e katkılarından dolayı teşekkür eder.

RELIABILITY OF MAKE AND BREAK TESTS IN ASSESSING INTRINSIC FOOT MUSCLE STRENGTH USING A HANDHELD DYNAMOMETER IN HEALTHY YOUNG ADULTS

Öz

Purpose: The make and break tests are used in isometric muscle measurement via a handheld dynamometer. This study aimed to compare the reliability of intrinsic foot muscle strength assessment with break and make tests in healthy young adults. Methods: Seventy-five healthy adults completed the test-retest protocol with five days between tests. The maximal isometric strength measure of intrinsic foot muscles was measured during make/break tests using a handheld dynamometer. Test-retest reliability was calculated using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC). Minimal detectable changes were calculated using standard error measurements. Results: According to the analysis, the strength results of the break test were higher in all muscles when compared to the make test (p<0.05). The strength measurements of the intrinsic foot muscles was found to have almost perfect test-retest reliability in the make and break test (ICC=0.938-0.986). Conclusion: Healthy adults showed stable test-retest results on all muscle strength measurements of the intrinsic foot muscles. The make and break test carried out usnig the handheld dynamometer is a reliable method for assessing intrinsic foot muscle strength in healthy adults. Both make and break tests are reliable measurements for the strength of intrinsic foot muscles.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Assessment, Foot, Muscle Strength Dynamometer, Reliability

Proje Numarası

yok

Kaynakça

• 1. McKeon PO, Hertel J, Bramble D, Davis I. The foot core system: a new paradigm for understanding intrinsic foot muscle function. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(5):290-5.
• 2. Kelly LA, Farris DJ, Cresswell AG, Lichtwark GA. Intrinsic foot muscles contribute to elastic energy storage and return in the human foot. J Appl Physiol. 2019;126(1):231-8.
• 3. Kelly LA, Cresswell AG, Racinais S, Whiteley R, Lichtwark G. Intrinsic foot muscles have the capacity to control deformation of the longitudinal arch. J R Soc Interface. 2014;11(93):20131188.
• 4. Chung K, Suh B, Shy M, Cho S, Yoo J, Park S, et al. Different clinical and magnetic resonance imaging features between Charcot–Marie–Tooth disease type 1A and 2A. Neuromuscular Disord. 2008;18(8):610-8.
• 5. Albert SF, Apps C, Ding R, Cheung JT-M, Sterzing T, Arnold J, et al. 4th Congress of the International Foot and Ankle Biomechanics Community. J Foot Ankle Res. 2014;7(1):A10.
• 6. Headlee DL, Leonard JL, Hart JM, Ingersoll CD, Hertel J. Fatigue of the plantar intrinsic foot muscles increases navicular drop. J Electromyogr Kines. 2008;18(3):420-5.
• 7. Myerson M, Shereff M. The pathological anatomy of claw and hammer toes. J Bone Joint Surg AM. 1989;71(1):45-9.
• 8. Kwon O, Tuttle L, Johnson J, Mueller M. Muscle imbalance and reduced ankle joint motion in people with hammer toe deformity. Clin Biomech. 2009;24(8):670-5.
• 9. Hoffmeyer P, Cox J, Blanc Y, Meyer J, Taillard W. Muscle in hallux valgus. Clin Orthop Relat R. 1988(232):112-8.
• 10. Soysa A, Hiller C, Refshauge K, Burns J. Importance and challenges of measuring intrinsic foot muscle strength. J Foot Ankle Res. 2012;5(1):29.
• 11. Bohannon RW. Reliability of manual muscle testing: A systematic review. Isokinet Exerc Sci. 2018;26(4):245-52.
• 12. Kim S-G, Lee Y-S. The intra-and inter-rater reliabilities of lower extremity muscle strength assessment of healthy adults using a hand held dynamometer. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015;27(6):1799-801.
• 13. Van der Ploeg R, Oosterhuis H. The" make/break test" as a diagnostic tool in functional weakness. J Neurol Neurosur Ps. 1991;54(3):248-51.
• 14. Lim J, Toh R, Chook S, Sebastin S, Karjalainen T. A comparison of the reliability of make versus break testing in measuring palmar abduction strength of the thumb. J Hand Microsurg. 2014;6(01):8-12.
• 15. Van Melick N, Meddeler BM, Hoogeboom TJ, Nijhuis-van der Sanden MW, van Cingel RE. How to determine leg dominance: The agreement between self-reported and observed performance in healthy adults. PloS one. 2017;12(12).
• 16. Fraser JJ, Koldenhoven RM, Saliba SA, Hertel J. Reliability of ankle-foot morphology, mobility, strength, and motor performance measures. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2017;12(7):1134.
• 17. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977:159-74.
• 18. Thomas JR, Nelson JK, Silverman SJ. Research methods in physical activity. Champaign, Ilinois: Human Kinetetics; 2015.
• 19. Haley SM, Fragala-Pinkham MA. Interpreting change scores of tests and measures used in physical therapy. J Phys Ther. 2006;86(5):735-43.
• 20. Schmidt J, Iverson J, Brown S, Thompson PA. Comparative reliability of the make and break tests for hip abduction assessment. Physiother Theor Pr. 2013;29(8):648-57.
• 21. Bohannon RW. Make tests and break tests of elbow flexor muscle strength. J Phys Ther. 1988;68(2):193-4.
• 22. Jeon I-c. Comparison of Test-retest Measurement Reliability of Iliopsoas Strength between Break and Make Test in Subjects with Lumbar Extension Syndrome. J Musculoskelet Sci Technol. 2019;3(2):54-8.
• 23. Jeon I-C. Comparisons of Test-Retest Reliability of Strength Measurement of Gluteus Medius Strength between Break and Make Test in Subjects with Pelvic Drop. J Korean Phys Ther. 2019;31(3):147-50.