A hand-held dynamometer (HHD) offers a reliable and valid method to quantify quadriceps strength in a clinical environment. While measures of peak strength provide functional insights, most daily activities are performed quickly and do not require maximum strength. Rate of torque development (RTD) measures better reflect both the demands of daily activity and athletic movements. The capacity to obtain RTD measures in clinical settings is possible with an HHD, but the validity of RTD measures has not been quantified.
To determine the validity of an HHD to measure quadriceps isometric strength metrics compared to isometric strength measures obtained on an isokinetic dynamometer. It was hypothesized that the HHD would be a valid measure of peak torque and RTD at all time intervals when compared to the isokinetic dynamometer.
Descriptive laboratory study.
Twenty healthy participants (12 male, 8 female) (age = 23.7 ± 2.9 years, height = 174.6 ± 10.1 cm, mass = 76.4 ± 15.9 kg, and Tegner = 6.7 ± 1.2) performed maximum isometric quadriceps contractions on an isokinetic dynamometer and with an HHD. Outcome measures included quadriceps peak torque and RTD at three intervals (0-100, 0-250 ms, and average). Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient were used to determine relationships between devices. Bland-Altman Plots with Limits of Agreement (LOA) calculations were used to quantify systematic bias between measurement techniques.
There was a significant correlation between the isokinetic dynamometer and the HHD for peak torque (p<.001, r = .894) and all RTD measurements (p<.002, r = .807; ρ = .502-.604). Bland-Altman plot LOA indicated the HHD overestimated peak torque values (19.4 ± 53.2 Nm) and underestimated all RTD measurements (-55.2 ± 190.7 Nm/s to -265.2 ± 402.6 Nm/s).
These results show it is possible to obtain valid measures of quadriceps peak torque and late RTD using an HHD. Measures of early RTD and RTDAvg obtained with an HHD were more variable and should be viewed with caution.
Diagnostic, Level 3.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 April 2026.
All research outputs
#2,306,212
of 34,377,743 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy
#209
of 1,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,371
of 391,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,377,743 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,324 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 391,661 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.
