Abstract:Background: Restoring maximal muscle strength of the knee extensors (KE) and knee flexors (KF) following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury and ACL reconstruction is of great importance to reduce the re-injury rate after ACL reconstruction and to reduce the risk of knee osteoarthritis. Therefore, it is essential that clinicians and healthcare providers use valid and reliable measures to assess knee muscle strength to ensure a safe return to sport. Purpose: To evaluate the reliability (test-retest reliability, inter-tester reliability and test-retest agreement) and validity (concurrent validity, convergent validity and ForceFrame (FF) vs. isokinetic dynamometer (ID) agreement) of the ForceFrame (FF) dynamometer during isometric testing of the knee extensors and flexors. Study design: Cross-sectional study. Material and methods: Twenty-seven participants with ACL injury or reconstruction were recruited for participation in this study. maximal voluntary isometric contration (MVIC) of the knee extensors and flexors was tested on two separate days. Day one included validity assessments with FF, a gold-standard ID and a handheld dynamometer (HHD). Day two included reliability assessments with FF performed by two assessors. Main outcome measures were day-to-day test-retest reliability and agreement and inter-tester reliability of FF, and concurrent validity (FF vs. an ID and a HHD). Reliability was tested as test-retest and inter-tester reliability using interclass correlation coefficient (ICC), while agreement was tested using Bland & Altman plots with limits of agreement (LOA), standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC). Concurrent validity between FF, ID, and HHD was assessed using Pearson's correlations and mean difference was evaluated by Bland & Altman plots. Results: Twenty-seven participants (10 females, 17 males) with a median age of 25 years (range 19-60) were included in this study. There was a good day-to-day test-retest reliability for MVIC of KE (ICC=0.77, CI95:0.48-0.90) and KF (ICC=0.83, CI95:0.61-0.92) and excellent inter-tester reliability for MVIC of KE (ICC=0.97, CI95:0.94-0.98) and KF (ICC=0.93, 95CI:0.85-0.97). Standard error of measurement (SEM) was 8% and 9%, while the smallest detectable change (SDC) was 22% and 27% for KE and KF, respectively. FF showed fair concurrent validity compared to ID for KE (r=0.56), poor concurrent validity for knee flexors (KF (r=0.24) and compared to HHD a moderate correlation for KE (r=0.74) and poor correlation for KF (r=0.12). Bland & Altman plots between FF and the ID showed a mean difference of -0.51 Nm/kg for KE and -0.32Nm/kg for KF. Conclusions: FF can be used to obtain reliable and valid results to assess MVIC of the KE, but not the KF. It should be noted that absolute results produced by the FF may be considered an underestimation of actual MVIC. The test position to assess KF in FF does not appear to be optimal, and different test-positions may be considered. Level of evidence: Level 3.

Reliability of two new single leg hamstring bridge tests and comparison to isokinetic strength tests

Semitendinosus and biceps femoris long head activity during the single leg bridge test in healthy individuals

Reliability of Ultrasound Assessment of Hamstring Morphology, Quality, and Stiffness Among Healthy Adults and Athletes: A Systematic Review

Precise instruction and consideration of the vertical and horizontal force component increases validity and reliability of the 90:20 Isometric Posterior Chain Test

Precise Instruction and Consideration of the Vertical and Horizontal Force Component Increase Validity and Reliability of the 90:20 Isometric Posterior Chain Test

Reliability of lower limb strength assessment in female team sport athletes

Validity, reliability, minimal detectable change, and methodological considerations for HHD and portable fixed frame isometric hip and groin strength testing: A comparison of unilateral and bilateral testing methods

Inter-limb strength asymmetry in adolescent distance runners: Test-retest reliability and relationships with performance and running economy

Specificity of eccentric hamstring training and the lack of consistency between strength assessments using conventional test devices

Hip- and knee-strength assessments using a hand-held dynamometer with external belt-fixation are inter-tester reliable

Validity and Reliability of Handheld Dynamometry to Assess Isometric Hamstrings and Quadriceps Strength at Varying Muscle Lengths

Validity, Agreement and Reliability of the ForceFrame Dynamometer in Patients with Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury

A review of the reliability of biomechanical variables produced during the isometric mid-thigh pull and isometric squat and the reporting of normative data

Lower extremity return to sport testing: A systematic review

Diagnostic Accuracy of the Bunkie Test versus the Isokinetic Hamstrings/Quadriceps Measurement in Patients with Self-Reported Knee Pain and Healthy Controls

The relationship between hamstring strength tests and sprint performance in female Gaelic footballers: A correlation and linear regression analysis

Intrarater Test-Retest Reliability of Hip Abduction, Internal Rotation, and External Rotation Strength Measurements in a Healthy Cohort Using a Handheld Dynamometer and a Portable Stabilization Device: A Pilot Study

Hamstring-to-Quadriceps Ratio in Female Athletes with a Previous Hamstring Injury, Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction, and Controls

The Validity and Responsiveness of Isometric Lower Body Multi-Joint Tests of Muscular Strength: a Systematic Review

A hop testing alternative for functional performance following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Reliability of a Musculoskeletal Assessment for the Examination of Cervical Spine Pain and Injuries in Special Forces Combat Soldiers