Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background

Post-traumatic deformities such as biceps tendon rupture or (peri-)articular fractures of the elbow are often related to a decrease in muscle strength. Postoperative evaluation of these deformities requires normative values of elbow strength. The purpose of this systematic review was to determine these normative values of isometric elbow strength in healthy adults resulting from studies evaluating this strength (i.e. flexion, extension, pronation and supination strength).

Methods

The databases of PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Sciences were searched and screened for studies involving the isometric elbow strength as measured in asymptomatic volunteers. The quality of the studies was assessed and studies of low quality were excluded.

Results

Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were of sufficiently high quality to be included in the present review. In these studies, elbow strength was measured in a total of 1880 healthy volunteers. The experimental set-up and devices used to measure elbow strength varied between studies. Using some assumptions, a normative values table was assembled.

Conclusions

Large standard deviations of normative values in combination with different measurement devices used, as well as the different measurement positions of the subjects, demonstrated that there is no consensus about measuring the isometric elbow strength and therefore the normative values have to be interpreted with caution.

Keywords

elbow extension elbow flexion isometric elbow strength pronation supination systematic review

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Sardelli

Tashjian

MacWilliams

. Functional elbow range of motion for contemporary tasks. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011; 93: 471–477.

Aizawa

Masuda

Koyama

et al.

Three-dimensional motion of the upper extremity joints during various activities of daily living. J Biomech 2010; 43: 2915–2922.

Gates

Walters

Cowley

et al.

Range of motion requirements for upper-limb activities of daily living. Am J Occup Ther 2015; 70: 7001350010p1–7001350010p10.

Nesterenko

Domire

Morrey

et al.

Elbow strength and endurance in patients with a ruptured distal biceps tendon. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010; 19: 184–189.

Ploegmakers

JJW

The

Brutty

et al.

The effect of a Galeazzi fracture on the strength of pronation and supination two years after surgical treatment. Bone Joint J 2013; 95B: 1508–1513.

Wretenberg

Ericson

Stark

. Radial head prosthesis after fracture of radial head with associated elbow instability. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2006; 126: 145–149.

Gûnal

Köse

Erdogan

et al.

Normal range of motion of the joints of the upper extremity in male subjects, with special reference to side. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1996; 78: 1401–1404.

Askew

Morrey

et al.

Isometric elbow strength in normal individuals. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1987, pp. 261–266.

Vermeulen

de Bock

van Houwelingen

et al.

A comparison of two portable dynamometers in the assessment of shoulder and elbow strength. Physiotherapy 2005; 91: 101–112.

10.

Bohannon

. Shoulder position influences elbow extension force in healthy individuals. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1990; 12: 111–114.

11.

Guenzkofer F, Engstler F, Bubb H, et al. Isometric elbow flexion and extension joint torque measurements considering biomechanical aspects. Proc First Int Symp Digit Hum Model. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fabian_Guenzkofer2/publication/228535401_Isometric_elbow_flexion_and_extension_joint_torque_measurements_considering_biomechanical_aspects/links/09e4150643c5e54fba000000.pdf.

12.

Singh

Karpovich

. Strength of forearm flexors and extensors in men and women. J Appl Physiol 1968; 25: 177–180.

13.

Murray

Delp

Buchanan

. Variation of muscle moment arms with elbow and forearm position. J Biomech 1995; 28: 513–525.

14.

O'Sullivan

Gallwey

. Upper-limb surface electro-myography at maximum supination and pronation torques: the effect of elbow and forearm angle. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2002; 12: 275–285.

15.

Shaaban

Pereira

Williams

et al.

The effect of elbow position on the range of supination and pronation of the forearm. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2008; 33: 3–8.

16.

Matsuoka

Berger

Berglund

et al.

An analysis of symmetry of torque strength of the forearm under resisted forearm rotation in normal subjects. J Hand Surg Am 2006; 31: 801–805.

17.

Rey

P-B

Jardin

Uhring

et al.

[Is there any correlation between the strength of pronation and supination of the dominant hand and that of the non-dominant one in right-handed healthy adults: preliminary results]. Chir Main 2014; 33: 17–22.

18.

Andrews

Thomas

Bohannon

. Normative values for isometric muscle force measurements obtained with hand-held dynamometers. Phys Ther 1996; 76: 248–259.

19.

Balogun

Onigbinde

. Hand and leg dominance: do they really affect limb muscle strength?. Physiother Theory Pract 1992; 8: 89–96.

20.

Bohannon

. Comparability of force measurements obtained with different strain gauge hand-held dynamometers. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1993; 18: 564–567.

21.

Bohannon

Saunders

. Hand-held dynamometry: a single trial may be adequate for measuring muscle strength in healthy individuals. Physiother Canada 1990; 42: 6–9.

22.

Coombes

Bisset

Vicenzino

. Elbow flexor and extensor muscle weakness in lateral epicondylalgia. Br J Sports Med 2012; 46: 449–453.

23.

Darcus

. The maximum torques developed in pronation and supination of the right hand. J Anat 1951; 85: 55–67.

24.

Douma

Soer

Krijnen

et al.

Reference values for isometric muscle force among workers for the Netherlands: a comparison of reference values. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil 2014; 6: 10.

25.

Harbo

Brincks

Andersen

. Maximal isokinetic and isometric muscle strength of major muscle groups related to age, body mass, height, and sex in 178 healthy subjects. Eur J Appl Physiol 2012; 112: 267–275.

26.

Herzberg

Berthonnaud

Bestion

et al.

[Testing of pronation and supination strength in the outpatient setting: a preliminary study]. Chir Main 2007; 26: 40–43.

27.

Kramer

Nusca

Bisbee

et al.

Forearm pronation and supination: reliability of absolute torques and nondominant/dominant ratios. J Hand Ther 1994; 7: 15–20.

28.

McGarvey

Morrey

Askew

et al.

Reliability of isometric strength testing. Temporal factors and strength variation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1984, pp. 301–305.

29.

Nogueira

Libardi

Vechin

et al.

Comparison of maximal muscle strength of elbow flexors and knee extensors between younger and older men with the same level of daily activity. Clin Interv Aging 2013; 8: 401–407.

30.

Timm

O'Driscoll

Johnson

et al.

Functional comparison of pronation and supination strengths. J Hand Ther 1993; 6: 190–193.

31.

Viitasalo

Era

Leskinen

A-L

et al.

Muscular strength profiles and anthropometry in random samples of men aged 31–35, 51–55 and 71–75 years. Ergonomics 1985; 28: 1563–1574.

32.

Wong

Moskovitz

. New assessment of forearm strength: reliability and validity. Am J Occup Ther 2010; 64: 809–813.

33.

Yang

Lee

et al.

The effects of elbow joint angle changes on elbow flexor and extensor muscle strength and activation. J Phys Ther Sci 2014; 26: 1079–1082.

34.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Open Med 2009; 3; 123–130.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.17 MB