Original researchHand-held dynamometry strength measures for internal and external rotation demonstrate superior reliability, lower minimal detectable change and higher correlation to isokinetic dynamometry than externally-fixed dynamometry of the shoulde

•Hand-held and externally-fixed dynamometry for testing strength of IR and ER of the shoulder have good to high reliability.•HHD is superior to EFD due to both a smaller SEM and lower MDC.•EFD is an appropriate method when athlete or support staff have no experience in HHD to monitor shoulder strength changes.•Both methods of dynamometry had acceptable to very strong correlations to isokinetic testing.

ObjectivesTo investigate inter and intra-rater reliability of hand held (HHD) and externally fixed (EFD) dynamometry for shoulder internal (IR) and external rotation (ER) strength and their correlation to isokinetic testing.DesignWithin participant, inter and intra-rater reliability study.ParticipantsTwenty active, healthy male and female participants underwent testing by two examiners.Outcome measuresIntra-class coefficients (ICC), percentage standard error of measurement (%SEM), and percentage minimal detectable change (%MDC) were calculated for inter-rater, intra-day and intra-rater, inter-week reliability. Maximum and average of three repetitions were compared to the isokinetic results at three speeds (60°/sec, 180°/sec, 240°/sec) for both concentric and eccentric contractions.ResultsInter and intra-tester values demonstrated good to high agreement (HHD, ICC range = 0.89-0.97, %SEM = 4.80-8.60%, %MDC = 13.29-23.70%; EFD, ICC = 0.88-0.96, %SEM = 6.60-11.00%, %MDC = 18.40-30.04%). HHD and EFD showed moderate to very strong correlations to the isokinetic testing (HHD, r = 0.45-0.86; EFD, r = 0.49-0.83).ConclusionsThe results of this study indicate that both EFD and HHD are suitable for clinical practice and research. Hand-held dynamometry is preferred due to its higher intra- and inter-rater reliability and smaller MDC and lower SEM.