Corey McGee

Handgrip strength is a widely used indicator of upper extremity function and a critical field-based tool in sports medicine for injury screening, rehabilitation monitoring, and return-to-sport decision-making. Despite the growing application of digital dynamometers, comparative data on their measurement precision and interchangeability remain limited. This study aimed to assess the test-retest reliability, measurement precision, and inter-device agreement of three digital handgrip dynamometers: GripAble, K-Force Grip, and JTech Commander Echo Grip. Twenty-five healthy adults (15 females, 10 males; mean age 36.2 ± 11.8 years) with no history of upper extremity injury participated in two identical testing sessions held 7 to 18 days apart. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC ₉₅ ) were calculated to evaluate reliability and measurement precision. Inter-device agreement and interchangeability were analyzed using repeated-measures analyses, fixed and proportional bias assessment, and Bland-Altman limits of agreement. All three devices demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.88–0.95). K-Force showed the lowest SEM (1.36–1.63 kg) and MDC ₉₅ values, indicating greater measurement precision and sensitivity to change. Inter-device agreement was good (ICC = 0.851–0.873); however, GripAble consistently produced substantially lower force values than JTech and K-Force (≈ 26.37–30.47% bias), with wide limits of agreement and evidence of both fixed and proportional bias. JTech and K-Force showed comparatively narrower limits of agreement and minimal bias, suggesting closer relative measurement alignment between these two devices, although the magnitude of these limits remains clinically non-negligible in the absence of predefined acceptance criteria. Although all three digital dynamometers demonstrated high test-retest reliability, the observed systematic differences in absolute force values suggest limited interchangeability between devices. We recommend that clinicians and researchers use the same device consistently across longitudinal assessments. The device-specific MDC values reported here, ranging from 3.77 to 5.87 kg, provide useful benchmarks for interpreting measurement change in healthy adults. As the current sample consisted of healthy adults, further studies are needed to establish device applicability in athletic and clinical populations.

Importance: Although individuals with thumb carpometacarpal (CMC1) osteoarthritis (OA) commonly experience participation restrictions, participation-focused outcome measures remain underinvestigated, and clinicians primarily rely on assessments of impairments in body structures and functions. Objective: To determine the concurrent validity, test–retest reliability, and precision of the Activity Card Sort 3 (ACS3) in individuals with nonoperative CMC1 OA. Design: Single-cohort observational psychometric study with repeated measures over a 2-week interval. Setting: Remote assessments conducted via videoconferencing. Participants: Thirty-three adults with radiographically confirmed CMC1 OA completed two virtual assessments approximately 2 weeks apart. Outcomes and Measures: Concurrent validity was examined by comparing ACS3 domain and total scores with the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0). Test–retest reliability of the “current,” “previous,” and “% retained” activities scores was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC _3,1 ). Precision was assessed using the standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change. Results: The ACS3 demonstrated good concurrent validity through strong associations with conceptually related WHODAS 2.0 domains. “Current” and “% retained” scores demonstrated good-to-excellent test–retest reliability across all domains. “Current” scores consistently showed the highest reliability and precision. “Previous” scores demonstrated lower reliability and greater measurement error, suggesting recall bias. Carrying forward “previous” scores from session 1 to session 2 improved the reliability of “% retained” scores. Conclusions and Relevance: The ACS3 is a valid and reliable measure of participation for individuals with nonoperative CMC1 OA. The “current” and “% retained” scores may support occupational therapy practitioners in conducting participation-focused assessment of persons with CMC1 OA.

Background: The Trapeziometacarpal Arthrosis Symptoms and Disability questionnaire (TASD) is widely used to assess symptoms and disability associated with trapeziometacarpal (TMC) arthrosis. Objective: To adapt the TASD into Turkish (TASD-TR) and evaluate its reliability and validity. Methods: Forty-one patients with TMC arthrosis were included in the study. Thumb function was assessed using the TASD-TR and the Thumb Disability Examination (TDX). Pain intensity was rated using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Power grip strength (PGS) and pinch strength (PS) were measured using the Jamar Hydraulic Hand Dynamometer and Jamar Pinch Gauge, respectively. Results: The TASD-TR demonstrated good test-retest reliability and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.786–0.859; Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) = 0.844). TASD-TR Total score showed a high correlation with TDX Total score (r = 0.706) but weak correlations with PGS (r = −0.342), PS (r = −0.290), and VAS (r = 0.373) scores. The TASD-TR Disability subscale was highly correlated with both TDX Total (r = 0.882) and TDX-ADL (r = 0.877) scores, and the TASD-TR Symptoms subscale was moderately correlated with TDX Pain score (r = 0.508). Conclusion: The TASD-TR is a reliable and valid tool for assessing thumb symptoms and function in Turkish-speaking patients with TMC arthrosis.

Introduction: Delivering occupational therapy services in the acute care setting requires certain skills and abilities to ensure safety and effectiveness among a variety of medically complex populations. Presently, no standardized tool exists to assess OT students’ self‐efficacy in this context. In this study, we developed the O ccupational Therapy Acute Care Self-Efficacy Scale ( OTACSES ) to assess OT student self‐efficacy in acute care contexts and tested its test–retest reliability and precision in first‐year OT students. Materials and Methods: Researchers developed the scale items based on literature, expert interviews, and a student population. The OTACSES was then administered to 47 OT students to assess the internal consistency of “abilities” and “knowledge” subscales. Following the process of item reduction, the scale was readministered a week later after a no “intervention” control period. Student test and retest data were analyzed to assess reliability and precision. Results: The finalized knowledge and abilities subscales demonstrated excellent internal consistency. Further, the total and subscale scores demonstrated excellent test–retest reliability and acceptable precision. Finally, changes of five, three, and seven points in the abilities, knowledge, and total scores, respectively, can be assumed to be “meaningful.” Discussion: The OTACSES is a reliable and precise tool for measuring students’ self‐efficacy in the acute care setting. We present preliminary data on clinically meaningful change. Further research focusing on the tool as an outcome measure of the efficacy of acute care‐relevant OT education and its appropriateness for use among practitioners is needed.